» 


A    VINDICATION 


OF     THE 


^   OF  PR/W^> 
^NOV  6    1937    ' 


FOUR     LAY  M E  N , 


WHO    REQUESTED    THE 


THREE  BISHOPS 


TO   PRESENT   CHARGES    AGAINST 


BISHOP  DOANE. 


-*•♦»► 


TRENTON. 

PRINTED    BY    EROWN    AND    BORDEN. 

1853. 


r 


L 


A  VINDICATION. 


A  sense  of  dutv  which  we  owe  to  ourselves  and  to  our  families, 
compels  us  to  appeal  to  the  bar  of  public  opinion  for  that  redress 
which  we  have  sought  in  vain  before  the  proper  Ecclesiastical 
Tribunal  of  our  Church.  While  there  was  a  hope  of  having  an 
opportunity  of  vindicating  our  characters  from  the  charges  of 
falsehood,  calumny  and  misrepresentation,  made  against  us  by 
Bishop  Doane,  we  remained  silent.  But  now  that  the  Court  of 
Bishops  have  accepted  from  Bishop  Doane  an  ambiguous  par- 
tial confession,  and  have  dismissed  the  charges,  without  deign- 
ing to  hear  any  evidence  against  him,  after  allowing  him  to 
use  every  kind  of  vituperation  and  abuse  against  us,  in  our  absence, 
we  feel  constrained  to  defend  ourselves  from  the  libellous  attacks 
of  Bishop  Doane  upon  our  characters,  in  the  only  way  now  left 
to  us. 

The  libellous  charges  which  Bishop  Doane  has  made  against 

us,  are  as  follows,  viz. 

"  In  replying  to  the  false,  calumnious  and  malignant  charges  of 
William  Halsted,  Caleb  Perkins,  Peter  V.  Coppuck  and  Ben- 
nington Gill,  covering,  as  they  do,  the  range  of  many  years  of 
public  service  and  of  public  sacrifice,  and  crawling  into  the  inner 
sanctities  of  private  life,  an  outline  of  the  course  of  events  with 
which  they  are  connected,  becomes  necessary.  A  starting  point 
must  be  given  to  honest  people,  from  which  they  may  see,  in  its 
true  bearings  and  real  complexion,  the  depth  and  darkness  of  that 
flood  of  falsehood,  calumny  and  malignity  into  which  these  four 
laymen  have  desperately  plunged." 

Protest  and  Appeal,  page  17. 

"  The  undersigned  has  done  with  the  details  of  the  false,  calum- 
nious and  malignant  representations  of  William  Halsted,  Caleb 
Perkins,  Peter  V.  Coppuck  and  Bennington  Gill.  How  many 
of  them  he  has  shown  to  be  false,  he  does  not  stop  to  count.  That 
falsehoods,  perversions,  or  distortions  of  truth,  insinuations,  or 
whatever  other  form  they  take,  they  are  calumnious  all,  is  apparent 
on  their  face."  lb. ,  page  49. 


These  charges  were  scattered  broadcast  through  the  land,  not 
only  in  the  state  of  New  Jersey,  but  in  other  states,  and  it  is  un- 
derstood in  Great  Britain  also. 

And  although  Bishop  Doane  in  his  confession  says,  "that  he 
penned  a  pamphlet,  parts  of  which  he  does  not  now  justify,  and 
expressions  in  which,  in  regard  to  these  brethren,"  (the  three 
presenting  Bishops,)  "  he  deeply  regrets,"  he  has  no  regrets  to 
make  for  the  publication  of  the  above  cited  libels  against  the  four 
laymen. 

The  four  laymen  will  now  proceed  to  vindicate  themselves  from 
the  false  aspersions  made  against  them  by  Bishop  Doaxe,  and  to 
show  that  the  charges  there  made  against  them  by  him,  are  false 
and  calumnious;  and  that  all  that  the  four  lavmen  said  against 
Bishop  Doaxe,  is  true. 

In  order  to  see  exactly  what  the  four  laymen  said,  it  will  be 
necessary  to  peruse  carefully  their  Letter  to  the  Three  Bishops. 
It  will  be  found  in  the  Appendix,  Letter  A. 

The  laymen  said  that  they  believed  that  the  foregoing  charges 
could  be  sustained  by  proof.  The  first  charge,  as  contained  in 
the  Third  Presentment,  as  made  by  the  Three  Presenting  Bishops, 
will  be  found  in  the  Appendix,  Letter  B.  It  is,  substantially,  "  that 
he  contracted  numerous  and  large  debts,  beyond  his  means  of  pay- 
ment, amounting  to  not  less  than  two  hundred  and  eighty  thousand 
dollars,  and  probably  three  hundred  thousand  dollars." 

The  proof  to  sustain  this  charge  is  as  follows : 

The  amount  admitted  in  the  Schedule  to  his  Assign- 

ment  is,  {see  Assignment,  Appendix  C.)  8155,993.07 

Supposed  average  interest  due  thereon  for  three 

months,  2,337.40 

Amount  of  mortgages  on  his  real  estate,  as  per  as- 
signment, 10G,343.00 

Supposed  amount  of  interest  due  for  six  months,  3,190.29 

Amount  due  Episcopal  Fund,  not  included  in  the 

Schedule  of  his  debts,  (Protest  and  Appeal,  p.  2S.)  7,470.57 

Amount  due  Princeton  Bank,  (see  List  of  Creditors, 

Appendix  D,)  1,079.00 

Amount  due  Paterson  Bank,  (Appendix  E,)  250.00 


Amount  due  Michael  Hays,  over  and  above  the 

amount  stated  to  be  due  him  in  Schedule  of  debts, 

[stated   in   Schedule   at  $17,500.00— should  be 

$28,000.00,]  (Affidavit  of  Hays,  Appendix  F,)  810,500.00 

Amount  supposed  average  interest  thereon,  three 

months,  157.50 

Amount  due  JosephDeacon,  above  the  amount  stated 
in  the  Schedule,  [Schedule  states  $23,480.00— 
should  be  $28,000.00,]  (Affidavit  of  Deacon,  Ap- 
pendix G,)  4,520.00 
Supposed  average  interest,  three  months,  67.00 
Amount   due   Herman   Hooper,  (see   his  letter  of 

2\st  June,  1852,  Appendix  H,)  50.00 

Amount  due  Morristown  Bank,  750.00 

"  "  Robert  Thomas,  Treasurer  Friend's 
Institution,  400.00 

Amount  due  outstanding  checks,     "  "  500.00 

"  "  Lawson  Carter,  (X.  B. — The  Schedule 
says  $6,000.00,  but  he  obtained  judgment,  March, 
1849,  for  $10,229.00,  and  allowing  $6,000.00  to 
have  been  paid,  leaving  balance  due  of)  4000.00 

Amount  due  Edward  Perkins,  (see  Germain's  Evi- 
dence, page  16,)  13,000.00 
Amount   due  Morris,   Tasker  &  Morris,  (Appen- 
dix D,)  220.00 
Amount   due    Cortlandt  Van  Renselaer,   (Appen- 
dix D.)  65.00 
Amount  due  Garret  S.  Cannon,  (Appendix  D,)                     127.00 
"     Robert  Holden,               "          "                        153.00 
Timothy  G.  Mitchell,     "          "                        175.00 
Lowe,  Smith  &  Co.,       "          "                        143.00 


"  William  M.  McClure,  255.00 

"         "  T.  Cooke,  363.83 

"  J.  Megargee  &  Co.,  48.80 

"         "  Jas.  F.  James,  233.61 

"        "  Dennis  McEvoy,  (see  Appendix  E,)  200.00 


Amount  due  Reuben  T.  Germain,  over  and  above 
the  sum  stated  in  the  Schedule,  [Schedule  says 
$1,000.00,  Germain  swears  it  was  $2,000.00,] 
(see  Germain's  examination  before  Wilson?)  $1,000.00 

Amount  due  Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaite,  over  and 
above  the  amount  set  out  in  Schedule,  [Schedule 
states  it  at  $1,470.00,  he  presented  claim  to  as- 
signees of  $6,775.52— difference  $5, 305.52,]  (see 
Appendix  D,)  5,305.52 

Amount  due  Peter  Stuyvesant,  money  borrowed,  1000.00 

Trenton  Banking  Company,  800.00 


a  t< 


$320,704.99 


Besides  a  check  exchanged  with  a  gentleman  of 
Philadelphia  for  $1,500.00— Bishop's  check  still 
unpaid,  $1,500.00 

And  a  debt  to  Zantzinger,  believed  to  be  $1,200.00 

Thus  it  appears,  during  a  period  of  about  eleven  years,  he  run 
in  debt  upon  an  average  of  over  twenty-nine  thousand  dollars  a 
year.  That  contracting  such  debts  was  immoral,  indiscreet,  and 
unbecoming  a  Bishop  is  apparent,  because  he  thereby  obtained  the 
property  of  others  without  any  compensation,  and  without  any 
means  of  making  just  compensation  therefor.  That  his  whole 
property  did  not  exceed  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  thousand  dol- 
lars, is  also  apparent. 

The  whole  of  his  real  estate  was  estimated  at  $074.00  over  the 
amount  of  the  mortgages.  $674.00 

The  amount  of  the  mortgages  was  106,343.00 

The  whole  of  his  personal  estate  was  only  esti- 
mated at  17,418.50 

It  brought  at  public  sale  $12,924.57.  

$124,335.50 


The  charge  contained  in  this  specification,  is  a  violation  of  a 

distinct  and  unequivocal  precept  of  the  Gospel.     St.  Paul  tells 

us  to  "  owe  no  man  any  thing."     Again,  he  says   in  his  Epistle 

to  the  Phillippians,  which  is  addressed  to  the  Saints  in  Christ 


Jesus  which  are  at  Phillippi,  with  the  Bishops  and  Deacons — 
"  Brethren,  be  followers  together  of  me ;  and  mark  them  that 
walk  so  as  ye  have  us  for  an  ensample."  Bishop  Doaxe,  in  one 
of  his  celebrated  sermons,  savs — "  We  are  the  salt  of  the  earth. 
We  are  the  light  of  the  world."  And  no  man  knew  better  than 
he,  how  much  more  efficacious  for  good  or  for  ill  is  example 
than  precept.  "  In  vain,"  says  the  Bishop,  "  Will  he  seek  the  refor- 
mation of  others,  who  neglects  the  precepts  he  enjoins  on  them. 
Physician,  heal  thyself,  will  be  in  the  heart  if  not  on  the  lips  ot 
all  who  hear  him.  And  while  that  which  he  says  is  forgotten  or 
disregarded,  that  which  he  does,  by  the  perverse  inclination  of  our 
corrupt  natures,  will  be  repeated  and  perpetuated  in  the  miserable 
copies  of  a  most  miserable  example."  How  many  miserable 
copies  of  Bishop  Doaxe's  miserable  example  have  already  been 
repeated  and  perpetuated,  it  is  impossible  to  say. 

Specification  II. 

We  shall  show  that  only  a  small  part  of  his  debt  was  incur- 
red on  account  of  his  Institutions. 

Bishop  Doaxe  purchased  St.  Mary's  Hall  on  the  first  of  Decem- 
ber, eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-six,  and  had  the  deed  taken  in 
the  name  of  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J. 
Watson,  to  be  held  by  them  in  trust  for  certain  persons  who  had 
subscribed  certain  sums  of  money  therein  mentioned,  for  the  con- 
sideration of  sixteen  thousand  five  hundred  dollars.  (See  copy  of 
deed,  Appendix  1.) 

At  the  time  this  purchase  was  made,  there  were  two  mortgages 
on  the  property,  one  of  eight  thousand  dollars,  as  appears  by  said 
deed,  to  Griffith  Evans,  $8,000.00 

One  to  George  Cummings,  1,500.00 


S9,500.00 


The  amount  then  which  appears  to  have  been  paid,  at  this  time, 
on  account  of  this  purchase,  was  seven  thousand  dollars. 

Subsequently,  or  about  the  same  time,  he  purchased  of  Mr. 
Gummere  the  furniture  of  St.  Mary's  Hall,  and  for  this  he  paid 
two  thousand  dollars.     This  furniture,  however,  he  did  not  convey 


// 


8 

to  the  trustees,  Wall,  Carey  and  Watson,  until  the  first  of  Septem- 
ber, eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-eight. 

On  the  same  first  of  September,  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty- 
eight,  Messrs.  Wall,  Carey  and  Watson  executed  a  declaration  of 
trust,  declaring  that,  in  consideration  of  the  receipt  of  certain 
sums  of  money  which  they  had  received  of  certain  persons  therein 
named,  (which  persons  held  certificates  of  stock  for  their  respec- 
tive amounts,  signed  by  C.  W.  Doane,)  they  held  the  St.  Mary's 
Hall  and  furniture,  &c,  in  trust  for  these  certificate  holders.  The 
amount  of  money  acknowledged  to  have  been  received  from  these 
certificate  holders  is  fourteen  thousand  eight  hundred  dollars.  (See 
deed  from  G.  D.  Wall  and  others  to  G.  W.  Doane,  Appendix  K.) 

The  Committee  of  Investigation,  page  12,  say  that  "above 
two-thirds  of  the  stock  of  twentv-five  thousand  dollars  was  sub- 
subscribed :  enough  only  to  pay  for  the  original  cost  of  the 
property. 

Now  if  we  deduct  from  this  amount  the  sum  of  nine  thousand 
dollars,  paid  Gummere,  we  have  remaining  on  hand,  in  cash, 
five  thousand  eight  hundred  dollars.  The  interest  of  this  was  three 
hundred  and  forty-eight  dollars  a  year,  which  could  have  been 
appropriated  to  make  up  any  deficiency  in  the  expenses  of  the  first 
years  of  the  establishment.  But  it  appears  that  on  the  nineteenth 
of  September,  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-eight,  he  executed  a 
mortgage  to  Horace  Cleaveland,  for  fifteen  thousand  dollars.  (See 
Appendix  L.)  Now  on  page  nineteen  of  his  Protest  and  Appeal, 
he  says  he  merged  in  the  work  his  whole  resources  and  his  credit. 
Again,  in  page  twenty-one,  he  says,  "  The  undersigned  gave  up 
his  property,  of  every  form,  to  meet,  so  far  as  it  might,  a  debt 
not  personal  to  himself — his  private  income  being  much  more  than 
equal  to  his  private  expenditure — but  growing  out  of  his  venture  for 
Christian  education,  in  the  two  Institutions  above  named."  We 
take  his  own  language  then  for  proof  that  this  debt  of  fifteen 
thousand  dollars  to  H.  Cleaveland  was  money  borrowed  for  the 
purpose  of  sustaining  St.  Mary's  Hall  and  his  Schools.  Add  this 
to  five  thousand  ei^ht  hundred  dollars,  and  it  makes  tvventv  thou- 
sand  eight  hundred. 


9 


In  September,  1838,  then,  he  had 

In  April,  1838,  he  borrowed  of  Joseph  Deacon 


$20,800.00 
5,000.00 

$25,800.00 


Now  we  shall  prove  that  the  schools  were  always  prosperous, 

with  the  exception  of  the  two   first  years.     But  he  says  in  his 

Protest  and  Appeal,  that  at  one  time,  when  there  were  only  twenty- 
six  scholars,  that  more  than  one  quarter  were  free.     Seven  would 

be  more  than  one  quarter  of  twenty-six ;  we  may  therefore  take 

that  number  as  the  highest  which  he  had  at  any  time  before  the 

schools  were  prosperous.     His  terms,  at  this  time,  for  board  and 

tuition,  were  two  hundred  dollars  a  year.     He  tells  us  that  we 

"  may  safely  estimate  the  profit  on  the  latest  comers  at  one-half 

the  term  charges."     (1847-8-9,  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  36.) 

We  may  calculate,  therefore,  that  these  seven  scholars  cost 
him  seven  hundred  dollars  a  year. 

But,  to  be  liberal  in  our  allowance,  let  us  suppose  they  cost  him 
one  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  per  year;  that  would  be  ten  hundred 
and  fifty  dollars  for  the  seven.  And  let  us  further  suppose,  that 
the  schools  did  not  enable  him  to  maintain  the  charity  scholars, 
without  advancing  money  out  of  his  pocket,  beyond  these  profits. 
From  the  vear  eighteen  hundred  and  thirtv-seven  to  eighteen 
hundred  and  forty-three,  six  years,  then,  he  would  be  out  of  pocket, 
for  money  expended  for  these  scholars,  six  thousand  three  hundred 
dollars. 

But  we  have  shown  that  he  had  a  surplus  of  cash  on  hand  from 
his  donations  or  certificates,  of  five  thousand  eight  hundred  dol- 
Jars.  The  interest  on  this,  if  he  had  invested  it  as  he  ought  to 
have  done,  would  have  been,  in  May,  eighteen  hundred  and  fortyr 
three,  at  simple  interest  only,  two  thousand  and  eighty-eight  dollars, 
and  would  have  amounted  altogether  to  the  sum  of  $7,880.00 
Deduct,  6,300.00 


$1,588.00 
To  this  add  the  $15,000.00  borrowed  of  Cleave- 

land,  and  $5,000.00  of  Deacon,— $20,000.00—         20,000.00 


$21,588.00 


10 

But  if  you  do  not  charge  him  with  any  interest  upon  the  cash 

received  as  donations,  you  would  still  make  the  amount  received 

by  him,  up  to  the  first  of  May,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-three, 

as  the  cash  in  hand  over  and  above  expenses,  $21,588.00 

Now  if  we  suppose  he  may  have  paid  out  on  St. 

Mary's  Hall,  at  this  time  or  within  two  or  three 

years,  about  5,000.00 


$16,588.00 


That  would  leave  a  balance  of  sixteen  thousand  five  hundred  and 
eighty-eight  dollars  still  in  his  hands  unexpended.  He  did  not 
purchase  the  grounds  for  Burlington  College  until  the  year  eighteen 
hundred  and  forty-seven.  He  then  purchased  it  for  twenty  thou- 
sand dollars,  and  he  agreed  to  pay  ten  thousand  dollars  in  cash 
and  give  a  mortgage  for  the  balance.  He  could  pay  this  out  of 
the  moneys  shown  to  have  been  received  by  him  for  the  schools, 
and  have  still  had  left  six  thousand  five  hundred  and  eighty-eight 
dollars.  In  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-seven,  he  began 
to  do  work  at  the  College,  and  he  had  on  hand,  to  commence 
with,  ten  thousand  three  hundred  and  eighty-eight  dollars.  Now 
we  will  see  how  much  he  received  after  this. 

But  it  may  be  said  that  St.  Mary's  Hall  did  not  sustain  itself 
until  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-five,  (see  evidence  of  Germain, 
Report  of  Committee,  page  73,)  and  during  this  time,  he  says  the 
gross  excess  of  expenditures  was  twenty-five  or  thirty  thousand 
dollars.  Take  the  largest  sum;  say  the  excess  was  thirty  thou- 
sand dollars; — that  is  he  had  to  pay  or  run  in  debt  for  thirty 
thousand  dollars;  because  his  receipts  for  his  St.  Mary's  Hall 
during  that  period  was  thirty  thousand  dollars  less  than  his  ex- 
penditures. Now  it  appears  that  he  had  contracted  debts  for  his 
schools,  or  in  his  venture  for  Christian  education,  between  May? 
eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-seven,  and  March,  eighteen  hundred 
and  forty-nine — eleven  years  and  v  eleven  months — say  twelve 
years,  of  one  hundred  and  forty-five  thousand  five  hundred  and 
ninety-three  dollars  and  sixty-seven  cents — (see  his  Schedule  of 
Debts,  Appendix  B) — or  rising  twelve  thousand  dollars  per  annum. 
From  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty-seven  to  eighteen  hundred  and 
forty-five — eight  years — he  contracted  debts  for  his  school  of  St. 
Mary's  Hall,  to  the  amount  of  eighty-four  thousand  dollars;  that 


L 


11 

is  fifty-four  thousand  dollars  more  than  there  was  any  occasion 
for,  according  to  Mr.  Germain's  calculation.  He  thus  got  credit 
upon  the  faith  of  St.  Mary's  Hall  for  the  amount  of  fifty-four 
thousand  dollars  more  than  was  necessary  to  carry  it  on  and  sup- 
ply every  thing  required. 

Bishop  Doane  says,  (page  20  of  his  Protest  and  Appeal) — 
"  That  the  pressure  of  patronage  forced  on  the  work  beyond  its 
time."  Does  he  mean  by  this,  that  the  patronage  came  sooner 
than  he  wanted  it,  or  that  the  scholars  came  before  he  had  build- 
ings and  accommodations  for  them  1  and  that  he  had  to  erect 
the  necessary  buildings  to  accommodate  them,  before  he  had  the 
means  so  to  do?  If  this  is  the  idea  he  intends  to  convey,  we 
now  proceed  to  show  his  statement  is  unfounded  in  truth,  and 
that  he  actually  received  in  cash,  in  the  years  eighteen  hundred 
and  forty-six,  seven,  and  eight,  more  than  double  what  he  paid 
for  his  schools.  The  work  which  was  done  to  the  College,  was 
chiefly  done  in  the  years  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-six,  seven 
and  eight. 

The  following  are  the  amounts  of  cash  he  had  on  hand  or  re- 
ceived during  those  years  from  various  sources,  viz : 
He  had  in  hand  from  subscription  to  St  Mary's  Hall,  as  before 

stated,  and  from  Cleaveland's  mortgage,  $6,588.00 

He  received  subscriptions  to  the  College,  (see  the 

pamphlet  published  by  trustees  in  1849.     Jn  his 

Protest  and  Appeal,  p.  20,  he  says  it  was  $8,000.)         1 1,000.00 
He  raised  on   mortgage   to    Sarah   C.    Robardet, 

March  11th,  1847,  (Appendix  M,)  3,000.00 

He  received  for  mortgage  to  Lawson  Carter,  June 

30th,  1846,  (see  Appendix  C,  Inventory  of  Real 

Estate,)  6,000.00 

He  raised  by  mortgage  to  Joseph  Deacon,  15th  of 

March,  1847,  (Appendix  JV,)  8,000.00 

He  received  by  mortgage  to  Isaac  B.  Parker  and 

others,  dated  15th  of  April,  1847,  (Appendix  O,)  13,900.00 
He  received  of  R.  J.  Germain  in  1848,  (Appendix  P,)  6,915.00 

He  received  of  Alfred  Stubbs,  in  October,  1848, 

(Protest  and  Appeal,  page  26,)  1,000.00 

He  received  of  E.  N.  Perkins,  in  1846,  (Appendix  C,)        15,000.00 


12 

He  received  Episcopal  Fund,  {Protest  and  Appeal, 
page  25,)  7,476.51 

Mortgage  to  Isaac  B.  Parker  and  others,  dated  10th 

June,  1848,  (Appendix  Q,)  50,000.00 


$128,879.51 
Suppose  he  realized  only  $30,000.00  this  year  from 

his  cash  receipts,  20,000.00 


$108,879.51 


Here  is  an  amount  of  one  hundred  and  eight  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  seventy-nine  dollars  and  fifty-one  cents,  received  in 
cash,  either  from  donations  or  borrowed  on  mortgage  or  other- 
wise. But  in  addition  to  these  sums  we  are  also  to  take  into  the 
account  the  amount  received  from  his  schools  during  the  vears 
eighteen  hundred  and  forty-six,  seven  and  eight. 

On  page  29  of  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  he  tells  us  that  the  an- 
nual receipts  of  his  institutions  was  not  less  than  seventy  thousand 
dollars.  This  money,  it  will  be  recollected,  is  paid  in  advance, 
bv  the  terms  of  the  institutions,  and  for  three  vears,  eighteen  hun- 
dred  forty-six,  seven  and  eight,  would,  at  that  rate,  amount  to  two 
hundred  and  ten  thousand  dollars.  (See  page  20  of  his  Protest 
and  Appeal.) 

On  page  20,  21,  he  says  it  was  well  established  that  if  the  "  two 
institutions  were  subjected  to  nothing  more  than  their  proper  ex- 
penditure, freed,  that  is  to  say,  from  the  disadvantages  of  a  credit 
system  of  business,  and  an  extravagant  outlay  for  the  mainte- 
nance of  credit,  a  very  large  per  centage  of  the  receipts,  after 
paying  the  whole  cost  of  carrying  them  on,  might  be  applied  to 
that  object;"  that  is,  the  reduction  of  his  indebtedness.  He  told 
Michael  Hays  that  his  profits  from  his  schools  were  twenty-eight 
thousand  dollars  per  annum.  This  for  three  years  would  be 
eighty-four  thousand  dollars.  We  have  then  as  the  amount  of 
his  receipts,  over  and  above  the  cost  of  carrying  on  his  schools 
in  these  three  years,  and  which  ought  to  have  been  applied  to  the 
payment  of  buildings  and  improvements,  the  enormous  sum  of 
one  hundred  and  ninety-two  thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventy- 
nine  dollars  and  fifty-one  cents. 


i 


13 

But  this  is  not  all,  he  tells  us  on  page  13  of  his  Protest  and  Ap- 
peal, that  "  he  anticipated  at  least  four  years  of  his  means  in  his 
efforts  to  maintain  the  institutions  he  had  founded."     Bv  this  we 

w 

understand  him  to  mean  his  wile's  income,  which  is  in  the  re- 
port of  the  Committee  of  Investigation,  page  23,  to  be  nine  thou- 
sand five  hundred  dollars  per  annum.  He  does  not  say  he  anticipa- 
ted it  all  in  one  year,  we  therefore  suppose  he  anticipated  it  yearly, 
and  that  in  the  three  years  of  eighteen  hundred  forty-six,  seven  and 
eight,  he  anticipated  twenty-eight  thousand  five  hundred  dollars. 
This  added  to  the  sum  of  one  hundred  and  ninety-two  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  seventy-nine  dollars  and  fifty-nine  cents,  gives 
the  a(rine£ate  amount  of  cash  which  he  must  have  received  in  those 

or?      o 

three  years,  over  and  above  the  cost  of  carrying  on  his  schools,  as 
two  hundred  and  twenty-one  thousand  three  hundred  and  seventy- 
nine  dollars  and  fifty-one  cents.  Now,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that 
this  calculation  is  made  upon  the  basis  that  he  paid  the  current 
expenses  of  his  schools  out  of  the  moneys  which  he  received  from 
his  pupils.  But  it  is  apparent  that  if  he  did  not  pay  the  current 
expenses  of  his  schools  out  of  the  money  he  received,  then  he 
should  be  charged  with  the  excess  of  his  receipts  over  his  pay- 
ments for  current  expenses  ;  for  instance,  if  he  received  seventy 
thousand  dollars  cash  from  his  pupils  and  actually  paid  out  for  the 
current  expenses  of  his  institutions  only  ten  thousand,  contracting 
a  debt  of  sixty  thousand  dollars,  he  should  be  charged  with  cash 
received,  over  and  above  his  yearly  payments,  sixty  thousand 
dollars  instead  of  twenty-eight  thousand,  the  sum  he  is  charged 
with  in  the  foregoing  calculation. 

o         o 

To  arrive  at  accuracy  in  the  actual  amount  of  cash  received 
by  Bishop  Doane,  and  which  he  might  have  appropriated  to  build- 
ings and  improvements  of  his  institutions,  we  have  to  ascertain 
in  the  years  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-six,  seven  and  ei^ht,  for 
the  current  expenses  of  his  schools.  Now  we  arrive  at  this  pro- 
portion what  proportion  of  the  debts  mentioned  in  his  schedule 
were  created  in  this  way.  In  page  21  of  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  he 
tells  us  his  debt  was  "  not  personal  to  himself,  but  grew  out  of  his 
venture  for  Christian  education."  He  commenced  his  schools  in 
May,  1837.  (See  evidence  of  Samuel  R.  Gummere,  page  95  of 
reports  of  investigating  committee.)     His  assignment  bears  date 


14 

29th  of  March,  1849,  that  is  a  period  of  eleven  years  and  eleven 
months.     During  this  period  he  had  contracted  debts,  as  appears 
by  his  schedule,  to  the  amount  of  one  hundred  and  forty-five  thou- 
sand five  hundred  and  ninety-three  dollars  and  sixty-seven  cents. 
(See  schedule.)     We  leave  out  of  this  calculation  the  claims  of 
W.  T.  Hall  and  A.  A.  Sloan,  against  the  building  erected  on  Bur- 
lington College  property,  ten  thousand  dollars,  and  taking  this  sum 
as  his  actual  indebtedness  incurred  during  that  period  for  the  cur- 
rent expenses  of  carrying  on  his  schools,  (exclusive  of  debts  con- 
tracted for  improvements,  buildings,  &c.,)  it  gives  the  amount  of 
indebtedness  incurred  annually  for  this  object  at  a  little  rising 
twelve  thousand  dollars  per  annum  ;   say  twelve  thousand  dollars ; 
he  must  then  have  received  in  the  years  eighteen  hundred  and 
forty-six,  seven  and  eight,  thirty-six  thousand  dollars  cash  for  cur- 
rent expenses  which  he  did  not  pay,  and  which  he  therefore  could 
have  appropriated  to  the  payment  of  buildings  and  improvements. 
This,  then,  added  to   the  former   amount  of  two   hundred  and 
twenty-one  thousand  three  hundred  and  seventy-nine  dollars  and 
fifty-one  cents,  gives  us  the  aggregate  of  two  hundred  and  forty- 
seven  thousand  three  hundred  and  seventy-nine  dollars  and  fifty- 
one  cents  of  cash  which  he  had  at  his  disposal  in  those  three  years, 
to  pay  for  buildings  and   improvements.     Now,  what  did  it  cost 
him  in  these  three  years  for  buildings  and  improvements,  and  for 
Philisophical  and  Chemical  apparatus  ?     The  College  was  put  up, 
as  Mr.  Shreve  tells,  in  the  years  1846  and  1847.     (See  his  testi- 
mony, page  111,  report  of  investigating  committee.)     The  build- 
ings of  Si.  Mary's  Hall,  as  we  gather  from  the  evidence  of  R.  J. 
Germain,  (same  report,  page  74.)  were  put  up  in  1844  and  5.    Mr. 
Shreve  tells  us  he  thinks  the  mechanical  work  for  the  College  cost 
Bishop  Doane   thirty-five  thousand   dollars.     But  how  much  of 
this  did  he  pay  ?     It  appears  in  his  schedule,  that  there  was  a  lien 
upon  the  College  building  due  to  \V.  T.  Hall  and  A.  A.  Sloan,  for 
about  ten  thousand  dollars.     Besides  this,  it  is  believed  that  up- 
wards of  six  thousand  dollars  of  the  debts  contained  in  his  sched- 
ule, was  for  work  and  material  done  for  and  furnished  to  the  build- 
ing  and   improvements  of  Burlington  College,  which  being  de- 
ducted from  the  amount  of  the  estimate,  would  leave  the  amount 
of  cash  actually  paid  out  by  Bishop  Doane  for  the  buildings  and 


15 

improvements  to  Burlington  College,  during  the  years  eighteen 
hundred  and  forty-six,  seven  and  eight,  as  nineteen  thousand 
dollars. 

If  we  suppose,  also,  that  he  paid  five  thousand  dollars  for  the 
Philosophical  and  Chemical  apparatus  and  Library  of  the  College, 
(although  it  is  not  probabie  he  paid  one-half  that  amount,)  it  will 
give  us  as  the  amount  of  cash  paid  for  the  buildings  and  improve- 
ments on  Burlington  College  in  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-six, 
seven  and  eight,  twenty-four  thousand  dollars,  which  sum  de- 
ducted from  the  amount  received,  left  a  balance  in  hands  during 
those  years,  which  might  have  been  devoted  to  those  objects,  of 
two  hundred  and  thirty-three  thousand  three  hundred  and  seventy- 
nine  dollars  and  fiftv-one  cents.     This  is  our  estimate. 

But  now  suppose  we  take  Bishop  Doane's  statement  in  his  Pro- 
test and  Appeal,  on  page  36  of  report  of  investigating  commit- 
tee, that  the  net  profits  of  the  institutions  in  1849,  were  only  nine- 
teen thousand  eight  hundred  and  eleven  dollars  and  seventy-four 
cents,  instead  of  twenty-eight  thousand  dollars,  as  we  have  calcu- 
lated. This  in  three  years  would  make  a  difference  of  twenty- 
five  thousand  four  hundred  and  sixty-four  dollars  and  seventy- 
eight  cents,  to  be  deducted  from  the  amount  received,  which 
would  still  leave  the  amount  received  two  hundred  and  seven  thou- 
sand nine  hundred  and  fourteen  dollars  and  seventy-three  cents. 

We  have  thus  shown  that  his  debts  were  not  incurred  for  Chris- 
tian education.  We  believe,  therefore,  that  under  pretence  of 
wanting  money  for  his  schools,  and  through  his  schools  after  they 
were  established,  he  obtained  large  amounts  of  money,  which  he 
lavished  and  squandered  in  the  most  reckless  and  extravagant 
manner,  wholly  unjustifiable,  even  in  a  man  of  the  world,  much 
less  in  a  Clergyman,  and  still  less  in  a  Christian  Bishop. 

We  have  shown  his  debts,  at  the  time  of  his  assignment,  to  have 
been  two  hundred  and  twentv-one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  four 
dollars  and  ninety-nine  cents;  all  this  enormous  amount,  he  pre- 
tends, was  incurred  in  his  "  venture  for  Christian  Education." 

In  setting  up  this  pretence,  we  leave  our  readers  to  judge  how 
nearly  he  resembles  him  of  whom  the  poet  says : 

"  Has  stole  the  livery  of  the  Court  of  Heaven 


To  serve  the  Devil  in,  in  virtuous  guise : 
Devoured  the  widow's  house  and  orphan's  bread ; 


16 

In  holy  phrase  transacted  villainies, 

That  common  sinners  durst  not  meddle  "with." 

The  doctrine  that  the  end  justifies  the  means,  will  not  be  main- 
tained by  any  Protestant  Christian.  We  quote  the  language  of 
an  acute  and  logical  reasoner,  Mr.  Hugh  Miller,  as  applicable  to 
this  point.     He  says  : 

"  What  we  have  to  deal  with,  are  the  stern  verities  of  monetary 
obligation  ;  and  these  no  Church  whatever,  not  even  that  of  Rome 
itself,  can  either  ignore  or  abrogate.  The  laws  of  monetary  obli- 
gation, founded  on  the  principles  of  eternal  right,  enact  and  enjoin, 
that  no  man  incur  any  pecuniary  liability  or  obligation,  on  any 
plea  whatever,  sacred  or  civil,  which  he  has  not  the  means  fairly 
and  adequately  of  meeting  or  liquidating.  The  duties  of  a  Church," 
(We  may  add,  a  fortiori,  of  a  Bishop,)  "so  far  as  they  involve 
monetary  obligation,  are  but  commensurate  with  her  pecuniary 
ability  of  discharging  them.  If  the  ability  does  not  exist,  the  duty 
is  not  required  at  her  hands;  nay,  she  would  be  guilty  of  positive 
sin,  in  attempting  to  fulfil  what,  lacking  the  ability,  would  be  a 
pseudo  and  fictitious  duty,  or  in  other  words,  not  a  duty  at  all. 
The  vengeance  of  Cod's  just  laws  would  overtake  and  strike  her 
down,  and  her  light,  instead  of  being  of  a  nature  suited  to  guide 
and  attract,  and  lead  men  to  glorify  the  Heavenly  Father,  would 
be  a  light  which,  like  that  of  a  beacon  placed  over  some  danger- 
ous rock  or  insidious  quicksand,  would  serve  but  to  terrify  and 
warn,  and  keep  the  wandering  voyager  far  aloof." 

Some  members  of  the  Honorable  Court  of  Bishops  have  carried 
this  doctrine  so  far,  that  they  will  not  consecrate  a  church  until  its 
debts  are  fully  paid.  We  honor  the  principle;  but  we  think  it  equally 
applicable  to  an  individual  who  ministers  in  the  church,  as  to  the 
church  itself;  and  if  this  principle  be  correct,  Bishop  Doane's 
schools  remain  this  day  unconsecrated  to  the  service  of  God,  and 
the  very  chapel  in  which  he  leads  the  service  of  God,  having  been 
built  with  monies  unduly  obtained,  or  still  unpaid  for,  remains  either 
wholly  unconsecrated  to  the  worshiy  of  God,  or,  if  consecrated 
at  all,  it  is  only  that  pseudo  and  fictitious  consecration  which  un- 
hallowed hands  could  give. 

There  is  one  other  allegation  in  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  to  which 
as  a  Churchman  of  New  Jersey,  and  on  behalf  of  Churchmen,  we 
desire  to  call  the  attention  of  the  public.  On  page  28  of  his  Protest 
and  Appeal,  he  insinuates,  if  he  does  not  positively  affirm  it,  that 
the  reason  of  his  embarrassments,  was  because  Churchmen  prom- 
ised him  relief  by  contributions,  which  never  came.     This  we 


17 

deny.  We  deny  both  branches  of  the  proposition.  We  deny  that 
Churchmen  promised  to  render  contributions,  and  we  deny  that 
his  failure  was  in  consequence  of  their  not  giving  what  was 
promised. 

But  the  allegation  in  the  *ast  clause  of  this  specification,  viz., 
that  all  the  sums  shown  to  have  been  expended  by  Bishop  Doane 
on  or  about  these  Institutions,  will  not  equal  a  moiety  of  his 
debts,  is  also  proved  to  be  true.  For  the  debts  are  shown  to 
amount  to  three  hundred  and  twenty-one  thousand  dollars,  and 
the  expenditures  are,  as  stated: 

By  J.  A.  Shre  ve,  (Report  of  Com., p.  1 1 1 )  for  College,  $35,000.00 
For  St.  Mary's  Hall,  40,000.00 

And  by  Cermain,  for  sustaining  schools,  from  1837 

to  1845,  30,000.00 


$105,000.00 


Now,  if  you  add  twenty  thousand  dollars  for  sundries,  not  re- 
collected, you  have  but  one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand  dollars, 
which  is  very  far  from  being  one-half  of  Bishop  Doane's  debts. 

Specification  III. 

That  he  procured  Michael  Hays  to  indorse  notes  for  him  under 
pretence  that  he  would  use  the  notes  indorsed  only  for  the  re- 
newal of  other  previous  notes  whereon  Michael  Hays  was  re- 
sponsible, and  that  he  used  them  for  other  purposes,  and  thus 
increased  Hays's  liability  nearly  three  fold,  without  his  consent. 
This  specification  is  proved  by  the  affidavit  of  Michael  Hays. 
(See  Appendix  DD.) 

To  induce  Col.  Hays  to  indorse  his  notes,  he  represented  his 
schools  as  prosperous,  and  he  promised  Mrs.  Hays,  who  was  ap- 
prehensive her  husband  would  get  in  difficulty  by  indorsing  for 
him,  that  upon  the  honor  of  a  man  and  the  faith  of  a  Christian, 
her  husband  should  lose  nothing  by  him.     (See  Appendix  EE.) 

Specification  IV. 

This  specification  is  proved  by  the  affidavit  of  Joseph  Deacon, 
and    by  the  letters  of  Bishop  Doane,  addressed    to  "  his  dear 
friend"  Joseph  Deacon.     (See  Appendix  C.  and  R.) 

B 


18 

Mr.  Deacon  swears  that  he  had  made  up  his  mind  not  to  in- 
dorse any  more  for  Bishop  Doane ;  and  that  on  one  occasion,  in 
May,  1848,  the  Rev.  J.  Germain  came  out  to  his  house  and  re- 
quested him  to  indorse  a  note,  or  notes,  for  the  Bishop,  which  he, 
Deacon,  refused ;  and  soon  afterwards  the  Bishop  came  himself 
and  urged  him  to  indorse  again  ;  that  'Deacon  told  him  that  he 
thought  he  had  indorsed  for  him  fourteen  thousand  five  hundred 
dollars  already.  But  the  Bishop  replied,  no ;  that  he  had  only 
indorsed  for  him  eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars.  The 
Bishop  said  he  only  wanted  him  to  indorse  notes  to  take  up  those 
already  indorsed ;  and  that  he,  Deacon,  consented  to  do  so,  upon 
the  Bishop's  telling  him  they  should  be  used  for  no  other  purpose ; 
and  also  telling  him  that  the  schools  were  prosperous,  and  that  he, 
Deacon,  should  never  lose  any  thing.  When  the  Bishop  failed, 
Deacon  found,  to  his  astonishment,  that  his  indorsements,  instead 
of  being  eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  amounted  to  double 
that  sum,  and  he  has  been  compelled  to  pay  them.  His  liabili- 
ties were  thus  increased  double  without  his  knowledge  or  consent, 
and  in  direct  violation  of  his,  the  Bishop's,  agreement. 

And  that  though  in  May,  1848,  he  told  Deacon  that  his  indorse- 
ments amounted  only  to  eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars, 
(see  affidavit  of  Sarah  Ann  II  Deacon,  Appendix  FF.)  and  pro- 
mised Deacon  that  all  subsequent  indorsements  should  be  used 
only  to  renew  previous  indorsements;  that  he  went  on  and  used 
these  indorsements  for  other  purposes  until  they  amounted,  by  his 
own  admission,  to  upwards  of  twenty-three  thousand  five  hun- 
dred dollars.     (See  Power  of  Attorney,  Appendix  GG.) 

Specification  V. 

The  charge  is,  that  he  got  Deacon  to  indorse  a  note  of  one 
thousand  dollars,  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  two  notes  of  five 
hundred  dollars  each,  on  which  Deacon  was  liable  as  indorser, 
and  that  having  thus  obtained  Deacon's  indorsement,  he  misap- 
plied the  note  of  one  thousand  dollars  to  the  taking  up  of  a  note 
of  five  hundred  dollars  on  which  Deacon  was  not  indorser. 

This  is  proved  by  Joseph  Deacon.  (Affidavit,  Appendix  R.) 
Also  by  the  letter  of  Bishop  Doane  to  Joseph  Deacon,  dated  20th 
December,  1848,  in  the  following  words : 


19 

"  Dear  Sir :  Two  notes  of  five  hundred  dollars  each,  with  your 
name,  done  at  Medford,  can  be  continued  in  one  of  one  thousand, 
dollars.     Mr.  Germain  will  explain  the  case  to  you. 

"  Your  faithful  friend, 

"  G.  W.  DOANE." 

And  another  letter,  without  date,  (as  all  his  letters  to  Mr.  Dea- 
con were,  with  the  exception  of  the  foregoing,)  in  the  following 
words : 

"Riverside,  Thursday. 

"  Dear  Sir :  I  saw  Mr,  F.  Woolman  yesterday,  and  again  to- 
•dav,  and  he  will  make  the  arrangement.     I  am  glad  of  this. 

"  I  shall  be  very  ready  to  enter  into  an  arrangement  with  the 
Bank  at  Medford  to  pay  off  the  five  hundred  dollars  in  instal- 
ments, say  to  begin  in  February.  One  hundred  February,  one 
hundred  March,  one  hundred  April,  one  hundred  May. 

"  Very  truly  your  friend, 

"  GEO.  W,  DOANE." 

Specification  VI. 

This  is  proved  by  the  affidavit  of  Joseph  Deacon,  (Appendix  R.) 
by  which  it  appears  that  he  borrowed  the  money  of  William  E, 
Page,  and  gave  him  his  check  for  it.  That  the  check  was  not 
paid  when  presented ;  that  some  time  afterward  he  gave  him  his 
note,  indorsed  by  Joseph  Deacon,  for  five  hundred  dollars. 

This  note  Deacon  refused  to  pay  Page  in  full,  because  he  said 
the  note  was  only  indorsed  to  renew  a  previous  indorsement,  and 
that  Bishop  Doane  had  no  authority  to  apply  it  to  the  payment  of 
a  debt  due  to  Page;  and  that  Deacon  paid  only  two  hundred  and 
fifty  dollars,  although  the  note  was  for  five  hundred  dollars,  ap- 
pears by  Bishop  Doane's  acknowledgement  under  his  hand  and 
seal,  dated  the  10th  of  August,  1850.     (See  Appendix  HH.) 

Specification   VII. 

This  is  also  proved  by  Mr.  Deacon's  affidavit,  (Appendix  R.) 
which  shows  that  at  the  time  the  Bishop  and  his  agents  were 
raising  the  fifty  thousand  dollars  loan,  the  Bishop  came  to  Dea- 
con and  told  him  he  must  subscribe  three  thousand  dollars.  Dea- 
con said,  why  should  I  subscribe.  The  Bishop  said  the  loan  was 
to  take  up  his  notes.  That  he  finally  consented  to  subscribe  three 
thousand  dollars  towards  the  loan,  and  to  give  Bishop  Doane  his, 
Deacon's   notes,  payable   at  different   times,  amounting  in  the 


20 

whole  to  three  thousand  dollars,  on  condition  that  the  Bishop 
should  keep  the  notes  himself,  and  not  pass  them  away  ;  and  the 
Bishop  promised  he  would  keep  them.  But  before  the  notes  came 
to  maturity  the  Bishop  passed  them  away,  and  thus  defeated  the 
object  Deacon  had  in  view  at  the  time  he  subscribed,  viz:  That 
of  offsetting  the  amount  of  certain  notes  which  Deacon  had  pre- 
viously paid  for  the  Bishop,  and  then  had  in  his  hands,  against  the 
notes  which  Deacon  had  ihus  subscribed  on  the  condition  that  the 
Bishop  should  not  pass  them  away  ;  and  Mr.  Deacon  thus  found 
himself  involved  to  the  amount  of  three  thousand  dollars  more. 
That  the  mortgages  were  not  sufficient  security,  and  that  Bishop 
Doane  knew  it  at  the  time  he  got  the  money  from  Deacon  also. 

(See  Appendix  Q.) 

Specification  VIII. 

This  specification  is  proved  by  the  affidavit  (Appendix  S.)  of 
Michael  Hays,  who  swears  expressly  that  he  was  induced  to  sub- 
scribe to  the  fifty  thousand  dollars  loan  on  the  positive  assurance 
that  from  said  loan  thus  raised,  his  indorsements  for  Bishop  Doane 
should  be  paid. 

The  records  of  the  former  mortgages  on  this  property  show 
the  prior  incumbrances  on  it  at  the  time  this  mortgage  was  insti- 
tuted, and  most  of  these  mortgages  are  stated  in  the  Appendix. 

Specification  IX. 

This  specification  is  proved  by  the  affidavits  of  Michael  Hays 
and  Joseph  Deacon,  and  it  is  shewn  that  while  some  of  the  fa- 
vored creditors  were  allowed  to  fund  their  debt,  that  is,  to  get  se- 
curity by  mortgage  for  a  debt  which  had  not  been  previously  secur- 
ed, that  others  were  induced  to  advance  money  under  the  belief 
that  all  the  subscribers  had  done  the  same;  and  that  if  the  fact 
had  been  disclosed  that  those  who  were  to  have  the  benefit  of  the 
mortgage  were  only  those  who  had  advanced  money  to  the  loan, 
very  few  of  those  who  did  subscribe  money  would  have  sub- 
scribed to  the  loan  at  all. 

Bishop  Doane  in  his  pamphlet,  page  45,  does  not  deny  that  he 
stated  that  the  amount  of  his  indebtedness  did  not  exceed  seventy 
thousand  dollars;  nor  that  he  estimated  that  fifty  thousand  dollars 
would  enable  him  to  pay  all  his  debts  except  sixteen  or  seventeen 
thousand  dollars. 


21 

And  he  also  says,  in  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  46,  "  that  a 
large  portion  of  this  loan  took  ihe  shape  of  funded  debt."  By 
which  we  understand  that  certain  of  his  creditors  undertook  to 
receive  security  by  way  of  mortgage  for  a  part  of  their  debts, 
(for  which  they  had  no  real  security,  and  the  condition  of  their 
subscription  did  not  appear  upon  the  face  of  the  subscription  pa- 
per,) so  that  other  persons,  who  were  not  in  the  secret,  might  be 
led  to  suppose  that  the  subscriptions  were  unconditional. 

The  letter  of  Bishop  Doane,  dated  May  12,  1848,  published  in 
J.  C.  Garthvvaite's  pamphlet,  page  8-9,  says,  the  proposal  was  by 
Thomas  B.  Woolman  and  Mr.  Dugdale,  and  others,  to  make  up 
a  loan  of  fifty  thousand  dollars.  The  certificate  signed  by  said 
Thomas  B.  Woolman  and  others,  in  page  9  of  said  pamphlet, 
shows  only  that  at  a  meeting,  on  the  15th  of  May,  1848,  that  it 
was  recommended  that  subscriptions  for  "  said  loan  be  received 
with  the  understanding  that  creditors  could  fund  their  claims." 
But  it  don't  appear  that  the  recommendation  was  adopted,  or  made 
a  part  of  the  subscription,  or  communicated  to  all  the  subscribers. 
Nor  does  it  appear  that  it  was  communicated  to  a  single  person 
who  was  not  a  creditor.  Thos.  B.  Woolman  and  Edward  Dug- 
dale, the  persons  who  proposed  this  scheme  of  loaning  money, 
and  then  funded  their  debt,  were  creditors  of  Bishop  Doane.  The 
first  for  four  thousand  and  thirty  dollars  and  thirty-five  cents;  the 
second,  two  thousand  seven  hundred  and  ninety-four  dollars  and 
seventy-four  cents,  as  appears  by  his  list.  And  the  other  two  gen- 
tlemen who  were  present  when  the  funding  the  debt  was  recom- 
mended, were  Thomas  Milner,  who  was  a  creditor  for  two  thou- 
sand nine  hundred  and  fifty-one  dollars  and  twenty-six  cents,  and 
William  R.  Allen,  the  President,  and  George  Gaskill,  the  Cashier 
of  the  Burlington  Bank,  to  which  the  Bishop  was  largely  indebted 
at  the  time. 

The  creditors  who  funded  portions  of  their  debt  are  as  follows, 
viz :  Thomas  B.  Woolman,  two  thousand  dollars;  Thomas  Dug- 
dale, one  thousand  dollars;  Franklin  Woolman,  one  thousand 
dollars;  Taylor  and  Dugdale,  one  thousand  dollars;  Thomas 
Dutten,  one  thousand  dollars;  William  H.  Carse,  one  thousand 
dollars;  Edward  Morris,  five  hundred  dollars;  Thomas  Miller, 
five  hundred  dollars;   William  A.  Rogers,  five  hundred  dollars; 


22 

Wardrof  J.  Hall,  five  hundred  dollars ;  Isaac  A.  Shreve,  five 
hundred  dollars;  David  Harmer,  five  hundred  dollars;  Rev.  Jas. 
A.  Williams,  one  thousand  dollars;  Alfred  A.  Sloan,  three  hun- 
dred dollars;  George  P.  Mitchell,  three  hundred  dollars;  Thomas 
Hopkins  and  Son,  three  hundred  dollars ;  William  C.  Myers,  three 
hundred  dollars;  Charles  H.  Fennimore,  three  hundred  and  fifty 
dollars ;  William  Stone,  three  hundred  dollars  ;  Francis  Roth, 
three  hundred  dollars.  These  amount  to  but  twelve  thousand 
one  hundred  dollars.  There  must  have  been  more  persons  who 
funded  their  debts,  but  which  persons  in  particular,  we  have  not 
been  able  to  ascertain.  For  Mr.  Germain,  in  testimony  before  the 
Committee,  page  78,  says,  "  The  larger  part  was  in  notes  and 
funded  debts,  so  that  the  Bishop  obtained  very  little  ready  money.'7 

Specification  X. 

This  will  be  proved  by  Mr.  Stubbs.  Mr.  Stubbs  says  he  offered 
to  pay  him  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  in  consideration  of 
his  giving  him  proper  security.  The  Bishop  declined  receiving 
the  money,  until  he  had  the  opportunity  of  a  night's  reflection. 
He  certainly  did  not  require  a  night's  reflection  to  decide  whether 
he  wanted  the  money,  for  he  was  so  pressed  for  money  at  this  timey 
that  the  committee  tell  us  he  was  paying  two  per  cent,  a  month 
for  it.  It  was,  therefore,  not  only  his  interest  but  his  duty,  tc* 
obtain  money  at  the  legal  rate  of  interest,  and  thereby  save 
eighteen  per  cent,  a  year.  Why  he  wanted  a  night's  reflection^ 
unless  it  was  to  enable  him  to  devise  some  plan  whereby  he  might 
obtain  the  money  without  giving  the  proper  security,  it  is  difficult 
to  devise.  In  the  morning,  Bishop  Doane  saw  his  way  clear  to 
obtain  this  money,  without  complying  with  the  condition  upon 
which  alone  it  was  offered  to  him ;  and  see  now  with  what  con- 
summate art  he  proceeded  to  accomplish  his  object. 

"  The  next  morning,"  says  Mr.  Stubbs  in  his  pamphlet,  page  7, 
"Bishop  Doane  said  he  would  take  the  money,  and  immediately 
wrote  a  receipt  for  the  same,  accompanying  the  receipt  with  a 
promise  that  he  would  give  satisfactory  security,  without  delay" 
His  agreeing  to  take  the  money,  necessarily  implied  that  he  was 
to  take  it  upon  the  condition  offered,  viz.,  that  of  giving  proper 
security  immediately.     Bishop  Doane  was  not  such  a  novice  m 


23 

borrowing  money,  as  not  to  know  that  with  all  business  lenders  of 
money,  the  receipt  of  the  security  is  a  condition  precedent  to  the 
payment  of  the  money.  Did  he  ever  obtain  money  upon  his  notes 
from  a  bank  or  a  broker,  without  their  first  having  the  security  in 
hand  ?  Why  did  he  not  deal  with  his  credulous  presbyter,  who 
he  knew  was  a  mere  trustee,  upon  terms  as  fair  and  just  as  when 
he  dealt  with  a  bank  or  a  broker?  Because  the  latter  would  not 
take  his  word  for  security ;  but  the  former  he  knew  would  not 
dare  to  doubt  his  word,  much  less  to  tell  him  so.  The  Bishop, 
therefore,  takes  advantage  of  the  ignorance  and  timidity  of  his 
poor  presbyter,  and  of  the  prestige  of  his  own  official  dignity  and 
sanctity,  and  says,  "I'll  take  the  money,"  and  without  any  hesita- 
tion the  money  is  handed  over  to  him.  When  he  got  the  money, 
did  he  offer  any  security  ?  No  !  He  sits  down  very  coolly,  and 
"writes  a  receipt  for  the  money."  (See  Stubbs's pamphlet, page  7.) 
Wonderful  condescension  in  the  Bishop  to  his  presbyter !  Well, 
what  does  he  put  in  the  receipt?  As  he  did  not  give  the  " proper 
security"  of  course  he  would  give  a  written  promise  in  the  receipt, 
that  the  "proper  security"  should  be  forthcoming  in  due  time.  But 
read  what  Mr.  Stubbs  says  on  this  subject,  and  you  will  perceive 
the  Bishop  does  not  deal  with  his  presbyter  in  such  a  business  way. 
He  says  he  wrote  "  a  receipt  for  the  same,  accompanying  the  re- 
ceipt with  a  verbal  promise  that  he  would  give  him  satisfactory 
security,  without  delay."  Well,  what  then.  "  The  Bishop  re- 
turned to  Burlington  with  the  money  in  his  pocket,"  and  the  Rev. 
presbyter  tells  us,  "  soon  after"  Bishop  Doane  did  what  ?  re- 
deemed his  promise?  No!  Hear  what  the  presbyter  says: '"Bishop 
Doane  sent  him  his  bond,  with  a  power-of-attorney  attached." 
What  do  you  think  of  such  a  redemption  of  a  Bishop's  promise? 
Bishop  Doane  might  as  well  have  sent  to  the  Rev.  presbyter  a 
"  case  of  green  spectacles"  for  any  valuable  purpose,  (except  that 
the  Bishop  might  have  supposed  that  a  presbyter  so  "green"  did 
not  require  any  thing  to  make  his  vision  more  verdant.)  But  even 
Mr.  Stubbs,  green  as  he  was,  and  with  all  his  faith  in  the  B-shop's 
promises,  tells  us  (in  page  8  of  his  pamphlet)  "  that  he  was  not 
perfectly  satisfied  with  it;"  and  he  would  have  been  still  less  satis- 
fied, if  the  Bishop  had  told  him,  as  he  ought  to  have  done,  that  he 
foad  put  an  additional  mortgage  of  fifty  thousand  dollars  on  his 


24 

property,  in  June,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-eight,  making  the 
amount  of  the  incumbrances  upon  his  real  estate,  at  the  time  he 
borrowed  the  money,  some  fifteen  or  twenty  thousand  dollars  more 
than  it  was  worth,  and  that  his  library  was  also  pledged  fqr  as 
much  or  more  than  it  would  bring.  But  it  was  no  part  of  a  Bishop's 
duty  to  instruct  a  presbyter  in  such  worldly  matters,  and  therefore 
the  Bishop  left  his  friend  under  the  pleasant  delusion  "  that  at  the 
time  the  security  was  given,  it  was  unquestionably  good."  It  is 
rather  unfortunate  for  the  judgment  of  Mr.  Stubbs,  upon  this  ques- 
tion of  security,  that  he  comes  in  direct  conflict  with  the  judgment 
of  the  committee  of  the  Bishop's  friends.  They  tell  us,  in  page  25 
of  their  Report,  "that  the  bond  and  warrant-of-attorney  above, 
was  no  security."  Well,  if  it  was  no  security,  then  that  part  of 
the  specification  of  the  three  Bishops,  above  quoted,  which  states 
that  the  Bishop,  "  after  promising  to  give  proper  or  satisfactory 
security,  sent  only  a  bond  and  warrant-of-attorney,  which  was  not 
satisfactory,  and  was  no  security,"  is  fully  sustained. 

When  an  executor  or  trustee,  instead  of  executing  any  trust  as 
he  ought,  as  by  laying  out  the  property  either  in  well  secured  real 
estates,  or  in  government  securities,  takes  upon  himself  to  dispose 
of  it  in  another  manner;  or  where,  being  entrusted  with  stock,  he 
sells  it  in  violation  of  his  trust — in  every  such  case,  parties  bene- 
ficially entitled,  have  an  option,  to  make  him  replace  the  stock  or 
other  property. 

2  Story,  Eq.  Sec.  1263.  Pocoche  vs.  Redd  in  gt  on,  5  Ves  800, 
(799.)  Harrison  vs.  Harrison,  2  Blk.,  221.  Earl  P  owlet  vs.  Her- 
bert, 1  Ves  Jun.,  295.  Byrchell  vs.  Bradford,  6  Mad  Ch.  235. 
Hill  on  Trustees,  378. 

So  if  a  trustee  should  invest  trust  money  in  mere  personal  secu- 
rities, however  unexceptionable  they  might  seem  to  be,  in  case  of 
any  loss  by  the  insolvency  of  the  borrower,  he  would  be  held  re- 
sponsible; for  in  all  cases  of  this  sort,  courts  of  equity  require  se- 
curity to  be  taken  on  real  estate,  or  on  some  other  thing  of  perma- 
nent value. 

2  Story,  Eq.  Sec.  1274.  Jldye  vs.  Feuilleleau,  1  Cox,  Rep.  24. 
Ryder  vs.  Bickerton,  3  Swan's  Rep.  80.  Holmes  vs.  Dring,  2  Cox, 
Rep.  1-2.  Wilkins  vs.  Steward,  Cooper  Eq.,  Rep.  6.  Hill  on 
Trustees,  378, 


25 


These  authorities  show  that  Mr.  Stubbs  committed  a  breach  of 
trust,  in  loaning  the  money  to  Bishop  Doane. 

But  a  person  colluding  with  an  executor  in  a  breach  of  trust,  or 
a  known  misapplication  of  ihe  assetts  of  the  estate,  is  made  respon- 
sible for  the  property  in  their  hands. 

2  Story,  Eq.  Sec.  1257,  1  ib.,  Sec.  4223,  Hill  vs.  Simpson,  7  Ves 
166. 

Bishop  Doane,  in  his  confession,  says  :  "  He  also,  in  entire  con- 
fidence in  his  ability  to  replace  them,  made  use  of  certain  trust 
funds  in  a  way  which  he  deeply  regrets."  Whether  he  means  this 
admission  to  apply  to  the  trust  funds  which  he  obtained  of  'Sir. 
Stubbs,  is  uncertain.  It  may  be  intended  to  apply  only  to  the  next 
Specification,  which  is  the  using  of  the  money  of  his  ward,  George 
D.  Winslow.  But  the  law  would  hold  him  liable  for  colluding  with 
Mr.  Stubbs  in  this  breach  of  trust. 

Specification  XI. 

This  is  proved  by  the  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  28,  and  by  the 
testimony  of  Mr.  Germain,  before  the  Committee  of  Investigation? 
page  71. 

That  he  knew  his  notes  were  no  adequate  security,  is  proved 
by  the  fact  that  he  could  not  raise  money  on  his  own  paper,  even 
with  Germain's  indorsement.  He  had  to  get  the  names  of  other 
indorsers,  to  give  credit  to  his  paper. 

Mr.  Germain,  in  his  testimony  before  the  Committee  of  Investi- 
gation, page  72,  says  :  "  I  considered  the  Bishop's  notes  perfectly 
good  at  that  time.  During  the  same  time,  I  think  in  eighteen 
hundred  and  forty-six,  seven  and  eight,  1  advised  my  brother  to 
invest  his  money  in  the  same  way."  Now  it  appears,  on  page  77 
of  his  testimony,  that  though  he  considered  Bishop  Doane's  notes 
perfectly  good  without  indorsement,  yet  after  he  had  himself  in- 
dorsed them,  money  could  not  be  raised  on  them  ;  and  that,  in 
order  to  raise  the  money  on  them,  it  was  necessary  to  pay  a  large 
premium  for  Hays's  indorsement ;  and  the  question  cannot  fail  to 
present  itself  to  the  mind  of  any  man  of  ordinary  capacity,  (and 
Mr.  Germain  could  hardly  have  failed  to  have  asked  himself  the 
question,)  if  no  bank  or  broker  will  loan  money  on  Bishop  Doane's 


26 

note,  with  my  indorsement,*  without  having  Hays's  indorsement 
also,  why  should  I  loan  trust  moneys  to  Bishop  Doane,  on  his  own 
note,  without  any  indorsement?  Mr.  Germain,  then,  must  have 
known  that  Bishop  Doane's  notes  were  not  at  that  time  considered 
perfectly  secure  by  any  one,  and  the  wilful  jeopardizing  that  trust 
money  could  only  have  been  brought  about  by  the  undue  influence 
which  Bishop  Doane's  position  exercised  over  this  timid  and  unre- 
sisting presbyter. 

And  it  is  further  manifest,  that  he  must  have  practised  deception 
on  R.  J.  Germain,  by  concealing  the  amount  of  his  indebtedness 
and  of  his  ability  to  pay,  or  Germain,  as  a  man  of  ordinary  sense, 
could  not  have  been  induced  to  loan  him  upwards  of  fifteen  thou- 
sand dollars,  without  any  security  but  his  promissory  note,  and 
this  too  when  the  greater  part  of  the  money  did  not  belong  to  him. 
R.  J.  Germain  admitted  he  lent  him  the  Episcopal  Fund,  amount- 
ing to  seven  thousand  four  hundred  and  seventy-six  dollars  and 
fifty-one  cents.  And  in  his  testimony  before  J.  Wilson,  Esq.,  he 
swears  that  he  loaned  him,  in  January,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty- 
nine,  on  his  own  note,  five  thousand  nine  hundred  and  four  dollars, 
and  that  he  had  loaned  him,  at  various  times,  and  there  was  due 
to  him  at  the  time  of  his  assignment,  two  thousand  dollars  more, 
making  fifteen  thousand  three  hundred  and  eighty  dollars  and  fifty- 
one  cents  loaned  upon  Bishop  Doane's  paper,  without  security, 
(see  Appendix  T.)  The  man  who  lent  this  sum  of  money,  must 
either  have  been  a  fool  or  a  knave,  or  else  he  must  have  been  de- 
ceived.    Germain  was  neither  a  fool  nor  a  knave,  and  therefore 


» 


*  Mr.  Germain  was  the  principal  indorser  of  Bishop  Doane  on  his  notes, 

as  the  protest  book  of  John  llodgers,  Esquire,  Notary  Public  in  Burlington, 

and  also  the  protest  book  of  the  late  Amor  W.  Archer,  show.     One  of  the 

laymen  has  several  of  these  indorsements  in  his  possession.     The  notes  are 

printed  blanks,  tilled  up.     The  following  is  a  copy  of  one  of  them : 

Burlington,  16  December,  1848. 

Three  months  after  date,  I  promise  to  pay  to  the  order  of  11.  J.  Ger- 
main, seven  hundred  dollars,  without  defalcation,  for  value  received. 

G.  W.  DOANE. 
Indorsed, 

11.  J.  Germain. 
Josepii  Deacon. 
ii.  W.  Doane. 


27 

he  must  have  been  deceived,  or  so  overcome  with  the  weight  of 
the  official  character  and  dignity  of  the  Bishop,  that  he  could  not 
resist  his  importunities. 

That  it  was  not  disclosed' to  the  Convention,  until  after  the  vote 
was  taken  on  Mr.  Halsted's  resolution  of  inquiry,  in  May,  eighteen 
hundred  and  forty-nine,  is  known  to  every  member  of  the  Conven- 
tion who  was  present  on  that  evening,  when  Bishop  Doane  (after 
the  information  had  been  reluctantly  drawn  out  by  a  series  of 
questions  propounded  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Sherman)  got  up  in  Con- 
vention and  acknowledged  that  he  had  borrowed  the  money.  "That 
it  was  not  secured  until  after  his  failure,"  is  also  proved  by  the 
minutes  of  the  Convention  of  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty. 

Bishop  Doane's  confession,  above  stated,  extends  to  thjs  charge, 
and  the  remarks  applied  to  the  preceding  charge,  are  equally  ap- 
plicable to  this  also. 

Specification  XII, 

Is,  that  he  violated  his  trust,  as  guardian  of  the  child  of  the  late 
Rev.  Benj.  D.  Winslow.  He  admits  this  specification.  (See  Pro- 
test and  Appeal,  page  42;  also  Assignment, page  29,  where  George 
D.  Winslow  is  put  down  as  a  creditor  for  one  thousand  dollars.) 

A  trustee  who  commits  a  plain  breach  of  trust,  is  not  protected 
from  the  consequences,  by  the  circumstance  that  he  honestly  took 
and  followed  the  advice  of  his  solicitor. 

Doyle  vs.  Doyle,  2  Schoale,  1  Lefroy,  243.  2  Spence's  Eq.  Jur., 
919.     Wick  vs.  Walker,  3  Mylne  and  Craig,  70G-8-10. 

The  same  authorities  cited  in  support  of  the  two  preceding  spe- 
cifications, are  applicable  to  this;  and  we  will  add  another.  Lord 
Kenyon,  Master  of  the  Rolls,  in  the  case  of  Holmes  vs.  Dring, 
(2  Cox,  Rep.  62,)  says :  "  It  was  never  heard  of,  that  a  trustee 
could  lend  an  infant's  money  on  private  security.  This  is  a  rule  * 
that  should  be  rung  in  the  ears  of  every  person  who  acts  in  the 
character  of  a  trustee;  for  an  act  may  very  probably  be  done, 
with  the  best  and  honestest  intentions;  yet  no  rule  in  a  court  of 
equity  is  so  well  established  as  this." 

But  the  relation  of  guardian  to  his  ward,  is  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant and  delicate  trusts.  All  the  principles  in  regard  to  trusts 
of  other  natures  prevail  in  this,  with  a  larger  and  more  compre- 
hensive  efficiency.     2  Story,  Eq.,  Sec.  317. 


28 

In  all  transactions  between  them,  even  after  the  ward  has  arrived 
at  age,  the  utmost  good  faith  (uberrima  fides)  is  required  on  the 
part  of  the  guardian. 

1  Story,  Eq.,  Sec.  317.  Hylton  vs.  Hylton,  2  Fes,  548-549. 
Wright  vs.  Sneed,  13  Fes,  130-138.    Wood  vs.  Dunn,  18  Fez.,  126. 

But  there  is  a  circumstance  of  aggravation  attendant  upon  this 
charge,  which  gave  it  a  double  edge,  by  which  a  two-fold  injury 
was  inflicted — an  injury  not  only  to  the  orphan,  but  to  his  widowed 
mother.  Not  content  with  taking  the  money  of  his  ward,  he  had 
actually  succeeded  in  setting  the  mother  of  the  said  child,  viz., 
Augusta  C.  Winslow,  to  be  his  security  to  the  amount  of  two  thou- 
sand dollars  on  his  guardianship  bond;  so  that  she  is  rendered 
liable  on  this  bond  to  make  up  the  money  taken  by  Bishop  Doane 
from  her  child.  {See  copy  of  Guardianship  Bond,  Appendix  S.) 
It  further  appears  by  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  42,  that  the 
amount  of  the  legacy  was  three  thousand  dollars,  and  that  part  of 
it  belonged  to  Mrs.  Winslow  and  part  to  her  child.  He  says  a 
part  of  it  has  been  paid  to  Mrs.  Winslow,  but  he  don't  tell  us 
when  nor  how  much.  We  hope  the  first  money  raised  by  the 
Diocese  for  the  liquidation  of  Bishop  Doane's  debts,  will  be  applied 
to  the  payment  of  the  debts  due  to  the  widow  and  the  orphan. 

Specification  XIII. 

This  was  not  one  of  the  original  charges  sent  by  the  laymen 
to  the  Three  Bishops,  but  it  is  a  charge  presented  by  those  Bish- 
ops themselves,  upon  such  evidence  as  satisfied  them  of  its  truth; 
the  evidence,  as  we  understand  it,  came  from  the  Cashier  of  the 
Camden  Bank.  We  had  no  doubt  of  the  truth  of  the  charge 
when  it  was  presented  by  the  Bishops,  and  our  conviction  of  its 
truth  is  further  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  one  of  the  Counsel 
of  Bishop  Doane,  only  a  short  time  before  the  last  session  of  the 
Court  of  Bishops,  paid  to  the  Cashier  of  the  Camden  Bank  the 
amount  of  this  debt,  as  we  were  informed  by  a  gentleman  of  ve- 
racity who  resides  in  the  city  of  Camden.  Why  this  Cashier 
should  be  paid  while  the  widow  and  the  orphan  are  left  unpaid, 
we  leave  it  to  every  man's  sense  of  justice  to  imagine. 

Specification  XIV. 

This  specification  is  proved,  first,  by  the  evidence  of  George 


29 

Gaskill,  Cashier  of  the  Burlington  Bank,  who  in  his  examination 
before  the  Committee  of  Investigation,  page  86,  says  : 

"  I  recollect  a  check  of  the  Bishop,  drawn  on  the  Burlington 
Bank  in  favor  of  the  Cashier  of  Princeton  Bank,  for  two  thou- 
sand two  hundred  dollars,  which  there  were  no  funds  to  meet 
when  it  was  presented  at  the  Burlington  Bank,  but  whether  there 
were  funds  to  meet  it  when  drawn  I  cannot  say." 

Second,  by  William  B.  Price,  who  in  his  examination  before 
the  Committee,  page  69,  says:  "I  think  on  the  2d  of  July,  1848, 
the  Bishop  asked  me  if  I  had  any  money  I  could  loan  him  ;  I  told 
him  I  had,  and  asked  the  amount  he  wanted;  he  answered,  about 
two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars.  I  drew  him  a  check  for  that 
amount,  and  he  then  gave  me  his  check  for  that  amount,  payable 
in  one  week,  or  thereabout.  Some  time  in  the  beginning  of  the 
following  week,  I  presented  his  check  to  the  Mechanics'  Bank  of 
Burlington,  on  which  it  was  drawn,  and  the  Cashier  told  me  there 
was  not  sufficient  money  there  that  day  to  pay  it." 

Thirdly,  the  Protest  book  of  John  Rodgers,  Esquire,  Notary  Pub- 
lic at  Burlington,  shows  that  on  the  14th  of  December,  A.  D. 
1848,  a  check  of  Bishop  Doane's,  payable  to  John  R.  Slack,  for 
the  sum  of  sixty  dollars,  was  protested. 

Mr.  Halsted,  as  Attorney  for  the  owners,  has  in  his  possession, 
ready  to  be  exhibited  to  any  one  who  desires  to  examine  them, 
the  following  checks  of  Bishop  Doane  on  the  Mechanics'  Bank 
of  Burlington,  which  were  presented  to  the  Bank  and  there  was 
no  money  to  meet  them,  viz : 

Check  payable  to  bearer,  dated  Nov.  10,  1848,  for  $1 14.00 

"  "      to  Joseph  Deacon,  dated  Nov.  11,  1848,        50.00 

to       "  "         "        Nov.  17,     "  50.00 

to       "  "         "        Nov.  25,     "  50.00 

to       "  "         "        Jan.  15,  1849,         25.00 

«       to  Cash,  dated  Jan.  20,  1849,  25.00 

«       to       "         "     Feb.  20,     "  18.75 

It  is  not  our  object  to  adduce,  even  if  we  were  able,  all  the  evi- 
dence which  the  Three  Bishops  had  at  their  command  to  prove 
all  the  charges,  but  only  to  shew  that  we  had  sufficient  grounds 
on  which  to  ask  that  an  inquiry  might  be  made  into  these  mat- 
ters. We  shall  refrain  from  swelling  this  publication  by  adducing 
anv  further  evidence  than  we  deem  necessary  for  our  vindication. 


<(  it 

tt  n 

a  a 

a 
n 


30 

The  heedlessness  with  which  Bishop  Doane  plunged  into  debt 
to  every  person  who  would  trust  him,  shows  an  utter  disregard,  not 
only  of  those  principles  of  prudence  by  which  men  of  ordinary 
morality  are  governed,  but  a  total  violation  of  those  evangelical 
precepts  which  should  be  the  guide  of  a  Christian  minister.  The 
avidity  with  which  he  grasped  at  the  money  of  other  people,  the 
prodigality  with  which  he  expended  it,  appears  to  us  to  be  totally 
incompatible  with  the  precepts  of  Gospel  morality.  St.  Paul 
says,  "  Having  food  and  raiment  let  us  therewith  be  content.  But 
they  that  will  be  rich  fall  into  temptation  and  a  snare,  and  into 
manv  foolish  and  hurtful  lusts,  which  drown  men  in  destruction 
and  perdition.  For  the  love  of  money  is  the  root  of  all  evil, 
which  while  some  coveted  after  they  have  erred  from  the  faith, 
and  pierced  themselves  through  with  many  sorrows.  But  thou, 
0  man  of  God,  flee  these  things." 

But  let  us  refer  again  to  the  celebrated  sermon  of  Bishop  Doane, 
before  alluded  to.  and  see  what  he  says  on  the  subject.  "  We 
claim,"  says  he,  "  to  be  the  Apostolic  Church.  Then  we  must 
shew  the  signs  of  the  apostles.  We  must  be  followers  of  Paul, 
as  he  was  follower  of  Jesus  Christ."  Now,  we  have  not  been 
able,  with  all  our  research,  to  find  any  record  that  the  apostles 
or  our  Savior  ever  owed  to  the  amount  of  a  Hebrew  Shekel  or 
a  Roman  Denarius  which  they  did  not  scrupulously  pay.  But  it 
is  recorded  of  our  Savior  that  he  worked  a  miracle  to  obtain  the 
piece  of  silver  with  which  to  pay  the  tribute  due  to  Caesar.  And 
this  simple  record  points  out  to  us,  in  a  most  significant  manner, 
the  extraordinary  efforts  every  follower  of  Christ  should  make  to 
pay  his  debts. 

But  the  Scriptures  not  only  warn  us  to  beware  of  false  pro- 
phets, they  tell  us  to  try  them.  Thus,  John  iv.  1 ,  says :  "  Beloved, 
believe  not  every  spirit,  but  try  the  spirits  whether  they  be  of  God. 
Because  many  false  prophets  have  gone  out  into  the  world." 

And  the  rules  by  which  we  are  to  try  them  are  clearly  and 
emphatically  laid  down.  Thus  Paul,  in  his  Epistle  to  Timothy, 
says:  "A  Bishop  should  be  sober,  of  good  behavior, not  given  to 
wine,  not  guilty  of  filthy  lucre;  moreover  he  must  have  a  good 
report  of  those  that  are  without,  lest  he  fall  into  reproach,  and  the 
snare  of  the  devil." 

Again  we  are  told,  "  by  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them.     But 


31 

the  fruit  of  the  spirit  is  love,  joy,  peace,  long  suffering,  gentleness, 
goodness,  faith,  meekness,  temperance." 

Bishop  Doane,  in  one  of  his  discourses,  speaking  of  this  text, 
says :  "  Observe,  the  result  is  to  be  fruit,  not  leaves  or  flowers." 
It  is  very  unfortunate,  we  think,  for  the  Bishop,  that  the  result 
was  not  leaves.  For  if  his  piety  was  to  be  judged  of  by  his 
leaves,  few  would  be  able  to  attain  a  more  exalted  position.     For 

they  are 

"  Thick  as  Autumnal  leaves  that  strow  the  brooks 
In  Vallombrosa." 

Unluckily  for  the  Bishop,  his  leaves  are  not  formed  of  such 
frail  and  perishing  materials  as  autumnal  leaves.  These  may  be 
dissipated  by  the  winds,  or  dissolved  by  the  dews,  and  rains,  and 
frosts,  of  winter,  or  converted  into  food  for  man,  or  beast,  or 
plant.  But  the  leaves  of  Bishop  Doane  can  neither  be  dissipated 
by  the  winds,  or  dissolved  by  the  dews,  or  converted  into  food 
for  man,  or  beast,  or  plant.  They  are  not  strowed  in  brooks,  but 
they  are  found  in  the  desks,  or  drawers,  or  pockets  of  his  credi- 
tors, where  they  are  preserved  as  enduring  mementoes  of  the 
High  Honor  which  Bishop  Doane  has  conferred  upon  the  Church 

by  his  works. 

Specification  XV. 

This  charge,  that  he  induced  Sarah  C.  Robardet  to  loan  him 
three  thousand  dollars  on  a  promise  to  give  her  security  worth 
six  thousand  dollars,  we  are  satisfied,  from  the  best  authority,  that 
this  would  have  been  proved  by  Mrs.  Sarah  C.  Robardet.  She 
is  a  lady  with  whom  we  are  unacquainted,  and  we  have  not 
thought  it  worth  while  to  ask  her  to  make  an  affidavit  of  the  facts. 
Because  we  think  the  substance  of  the  charge  is  fully  proved  by 
the  following  evidence: 

1.  The  abstract  of  the  mort^a^e   from  George  W.  Doane  and 

CD      CD  O 

wife  to  William  Chester,  bearing  date  on  the  26th  day  of  May, 
A.  D.  1846,  for  the  sum  of  two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars. 
(.See  Appendix  V.) 

2.  The  abstract  of  the  mortgage  from  G.  W.  Doane  and  wife 
to  Sarah  C.  Robardet,  for  the  sum  of  three  thousand  dollars,  da- 
ted the  11th  of  March,  1847.     (See  Appendix  M) 

3.  A  certificate   from   Joseph  F.  Burr,  Clerk  of  Burlington 


32 

County,  under  his  sea]  of  office,  dated  10th  of  September,  1853, 
certifying  that  the  mortgage  to  William  Chester,  of  two  thousand 
five  hundred  dollars,  is  still  existing  on  the  record  uncancelled. 
(See  appendix  V.) 

4.  The  certified  copy  of  the  assignment  of  Bishop  Doane  and 
inventory  of  real  estate,  with  the  oath  of  Bishop  Doane  attached. 
(See  Appendix  C.)  This  document  contains  the  following  lan- 
guage:  "  No.  3,  a  farm  containing  twelve  acres,  more  or  less, 
lying  between  Burlington  College  property  and  the  Railroad,  sub- 
ject to  a  mortgage  to  William  Chester  for  eight  hundred  dollars, 
also  to  a  mortgage  to  Sarah  C.  Robardet  for  three  thousand  dol- 
lars, valued  at  four  thousand  dollars." 

Now  Bishop  Doane,  on  page  30  of  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  tells 
us  "  that  his  real  estate  was  valued  by  the  assignees  themselves, 
after  consultation  with  several  persons  acquainted  with  the  pro- 
perty; and  the  best  evidence  that  they  were  well  advised,  is,  that 
six  months  after  the  assignment  was  made,  all  this  property  was 
exposed  to  public  sale,  open  to  competition  from  every  quarter, 
and  brought  precisely  the  price  at  which  it  was  valued."  Bishop 
Doane  also  swore  to  the  valuation.  We  take  it  for  granted,  there- 
fore, that  this  twelve  acre  lot,  No.  3,  mortgaged  to  Mrs.  Robar- 
det for  three  thousand  dollars,  was  worth  at  the  date  of  the  as- 
'signment,  viz.,  on  the  29th  of  March,  1849,  exactly  three  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  one  dollars.  Now  if  this  is  true,  how 
could  it  have  been,  on  the  11th  of  March,  1847,  when  he  mort- 
gaged it  to  Mrs.  Robardet,  good  security  for  five  thousand  five 
hundred  dollars?  It  was  at  that  time  mortgaged  to  Chester  for 
two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars.  Why  then  did  he  impose  it 
upon  Mrs.  Robardet  as  security  for  one  thousand  six  hundred  and 
ninety-nine  dollars  more  than  he  knew  it  to  be  worth?  Jf  this  is 
not  proof  of  his  taking  an  undue  advantage  of  a  confiding  woman, 
we  do  not  know  what  amount  of  evidence  will  prove  it. 

Specification  XVI. 

This  charge  is  not  one  of  the  original  charges  of  the  three 
laymen,  but  it  is  one  presented  by  the  three  Bishops,  and  it  is  sub- 
stantially proved  by  the  letter  of  Herman  Hooper  to  the  Com- 
mittee of  Investigation,  dated  June  twenty-first,  eighteen  hundred 
and  fifty-two,  (Report  of  Committee,  page  142.)     This  letter  was 


33 

written  after  Hooker  had  been  paid  by  the  proceeds  of  the  sale  of 
that  mendacious,  calumnious  and  blasphemous  pamphlet,  the  Pro- 
test and  Appeal,  and  was  written  with  a  view  of  palliating  the 
transaction,  as  far  as  possible.  And  yet  this  is  the  statement  as 
made  to  Bishop  Doane  himself:  "You  purchased  some  books  of 
me  for  your  parish  library,  amounting  altogether,  I  think,  to  about 
fifty  dollars.  You  requested  me  to  charge  them  to  you,  which  I 
was  ready  enough  to  do.  I  think  it  was  something  like  a  year 
before  the  assignment.  When  that  event  was  published,  remem- 
bering that  the  books  were  for  the  parish  library,  and  thinking, 
perhaps  the  Church  was  bound  to  pay  for  them,  I  wrote  to  Mr. 
Milnor,  as  I  understood,  of  the  Vestry.  I  did  this,  not  willing 
at  the  time  to  add  to  your  troubles,  by  calling  your  attention  to  it. 
Mr.  Milnor  replied,  in  substance,  that  the  money  had  been  put  in 
your  hands  to  purchase  the  books,  and  the  books  had  been  placed 
in  the  library  for  the  same,  saying  he  thought  the  facts  had  passed 
from  your  mind,  desiring  me  to  write  to  you,  which  I  soon  after 
did,  but  received  no  reply  from  you,  and  there  the  matter  rested." 

The  representation  made  by  Hooker  to  one  of  the  three  Bishops, 
and  which  we  have  in  the  Bishop's  handwriting,  is  as  follows: 

Hooker  said — "That  when  Bishop  Doane  applied  to  him  for 
books,  he  (Doane)  did  not  say  he  had  the  money  for  them.  He 
(Hooker)  knew  then  his  credit  was  not  good.  About  a  year  after, 
not  having  heard  from  him  about  the  pay,  he  (Hooker)  wrote  him, 
and  got  no  answer.  When  he  saw  the  debt  was  not  mentioned  in 
the  assignment,  he  wrote  to  Thomas  Milnor,  who  answered,  that 
the  money  had  been  collected  and  paid  Bishop  Doane,  and  he  had 
settled  with  the  Vestry,  and  he  (Milnor)  thought  Bishop  Doane 
must  have  forgotten  it.  Hooker  wrote  Bishop  Doane  again,  and 
got  no  answer.  He  received  not  the  least  word  or  observation 
from  him  about  it,  although  Bishop  Doane  had  been  in  his  store, 
particularly  when  he  applied  to  him  to  allow  him  to  place  his 
Appeal  and  Protest  at  his  store  for  sale.  At  last,  when  the  C3m- 
mittee  of  the  New  Jersey  Convention  was  sitting  in  Burlington, 
and  after  Hooker  had  declined  attending  it,  Bishop  Doane  went  to 
him  and  asked  him  to  go  before  it,  saying  that  the  case  in  which 
Hooker  was  involved,  gave  him  more  pain  than  almost  any  other. 
Hooker  declined  going,  but  said  he  would  write  a  letter.     He  then 

c 


34 

said  to  Bishop  Doane,  that  he  (Doane)  had  taken  no  notice  of  any 
of  his  letters ;  that  by  the  sale  of  the  Appeal,  &c,  he  (Hooker) 
had  got  into  his  (Doane's)  debt,  and  he  should  pay  himself  out  of 
that.  So  that  the  debt  for  the  books  remained  unpaid  in  any  part 
until  then,  and  unnoticed  in  any  way  by  Bishop  Doane  until  then. 
Hooker  says  he  wrote  his  letter  very  cautiously  and  with  reserve." 

Specification  XVII. 

This  specification  includes  the  names  of  all  the  persons  who 
were  induced  to  loan  parts  of  the  sum  of  fifty  thousand  dollars, 
and  other  debts  to  the  amount  of  seventy-nine  thousand  dollars, 
after  he  was  insolvent,  without  disclosing  his  real  condition. 

The  evidence  to  support  this  charge,  is  found  in  the  mortgage 
to  Sarah  C.  Robardet,  {Appendix  M)  In  the  assignment  of  Bishop 
Doane,  where  Thomas  Dutten  is  put  down  as  a  creditor  to  the 
amount  of  two  thousand  four  hundred  and  ninety-four  dollars  and 
thirty-one  cents;  William  B.  Price  for  four  hundred  and  fifty-one 
dollars  and  three  cents ;  Rev.  A.  Stubbs  for  one  thousand  dollars  ; 
Michael  Hays  for  seventeen  thousand  five  hundred  dollars ;  Joseph 
Deacon  for  twenty-three  thousand  four  hundred  and  fifty  dollars; 
William  H.  Carse  for  five  hundred  and  nineteen  dollars  and  thir- 
teen cents.  Also  the  affidavits  of  Michael  Hays  and  Joseph 
Deacon  (Appendix  DD  and  B.)  Letter  of  Mary  Carse,  dated 
February  twenty-six,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty,  also  of  March 
seven,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty,  (Appendix  W.)* 

It  is  proved  by  the  mortgage  of  Bishop  Doane  to  Isaac  B. 
Parker,  Thomas  Milnor  and  others,  (Appendix  Q.)  Also  by  the 
pamphlet  of  Alfred  Stubbs,  entitled  "  A  Pastoral  Letter  in  refer- 
ence to  the  charge  of  false  representations  made  against  the  Bishop 
of  New  Jersey."  It  is  proved  by  Bishop  Doane's  Protest  and  Ap- 
peal, pages  26,  27,  42,  43,  44.  It  is  proved  by  his  assignment, 
(Appendix  C.) 

It  is  because  Bishops  are  the  lights  of  the  Church,  that  they  are 
so  to  let  their  lights  shine  before  men,  that  they  may  see  their  good 


*  We  have  copies  of  several  other  of  the  letters  of  Mrs.  Carse  to  Bishop 
Doane,  equally  rich  and  severe  ;  and  it  was  doubtless  nothing  but  the  vigor 
of  her  pen  and  the  fear  of  exposure,  which  ever  induced  the  payment  of 
her  husband's  debt. 


35 

vvorks,  and  glorify  their  Father  which  is  in  Heaven.  If  they 
violate  the  laws  of  God,  which  they  are  ordained  to  preach,  they 
become  most  fearful  and  dangerous  stumbling  blocks  to  them  that 
are  weak. 

If  practices  such  as  those  of  which  Bishop  Doane  is  accused, 
are  tolerated  in  the  heads  of  the  Church,  what  may  we  not  expect 
in  the  pastors,  and  if  these  practices  become  common  with  the 
preacher,  what  may  we  not  expect  from  the  people.  How  long 
will  it  be,  under  the  influence  of  such  examples,  before  we  shall 
find  our  Priests  adopting  the  custom  which  it  is  said  prevails  in 
Mexico,  of  going  from  the  Communion  to  the  cock-pit,  from  the 
church  to  the  theatre,  from  the  house  of  God  to  the  gambling 
table?  If  we  wish  to  have  our  religion  pure,  we  must  have  a 
Priesthood  undefiled,  for  example  speaks  louder  than  precept.  In 
the  language  of  Hooker,  "He  who  would  set  the  hearts  of  men 
on  fire  with  the  love  of  Christ,  must  himself  burn  with  love": 
and  Bishop  Doane,  in  his  Triennial  Charge,  published  in  eighteen 
hundred  and  forty-eight,  says :  "  So  must  our  preaching,  reverend 
brethren,  be  delusive  and  destructive,  if  we  frame  not  our  lives  in 
humbleness  and  holiness,  and  heavenly-mindedness,  in  self-denial, 
self-devotion  and  self-sacrifice,  upon  the  model  of  the  Crucified." 

We  are  told,  also,  that  the  prayer  of  the  righteous  availeth 
much,  but  the  sacrifice  of  the  wicked  is  an  abomination  unto  the 
Lord.  The  Lord  is  far  from  the  wicked,  but  he  heareth  the  prayer 
of  the  righteous.  Is  it  to  be  contended,  in  opposition  to  such  plain 
and  explicit  declarations,  that  it  matters  not  whether  a  Bishop  is 
a  righteous  man  or  not ;  that  if  he  is  only  invested  with  the  sur- 
plice or  the  gown,  that  all  his  sacred  functions  can  be  as  well  per- 
formed, and  will  be  as  effectually  blessed  to  the  salvation  of  souls, 
as  if  he  was  a  sincere  and  humble  follower  of  his  Lord  and 
Master? 

Specification  XVIII. 

This  states  a  fraud  upon  Michael  Hays,  in  giving  him  an  assign- 
ment of  his  wife's  annuity,  when  he  had  previously  assigned  it  to 
Edward  N.  Perkins  and  Joseph  Deacon,  and  is  proved  by  the 
agreement  and  power  of  attorney,  {Appendix  GG  and  HH,)  and 


: 


36 

by  a  certified  copy  of  the  record  of  the  suit  against  the  trustee, 
{Appendix  W,)  and  by  the  affidavit  of  Michael  Hays,  (Appendix 
DD.)  and  the  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  43. 

The  conduct  of  Bishop  Doane  towards  Michael  Hays,  in  this 
matter,  was  an  express  violation  of  St.  Paul's  declaration,  who 
says :  "  That  no  man  go  beyond,  and  defraud  his  neighbor  in  any 
matter;  because  that  the  Lord  is  the  avenger  of  all  such,  as  we 
also  have  forewarned  you  and  testified." — 1  Thess.,  iv.,  6. 

It  is,  moreover,  a  direct  violation  of  the  command  of  our  Sa- 
vior, "  Defraud  not."     Mark,  x.  19. 

One  of  the  allegations  in  this  specification,  presents  an  extraor- 
dinary and  most  aggravated  injury  against  Michael  Hays.  He 
first  enters  into  agreement  with  Hays,  to  induce  him  not  to  set  up 
any  defence  of  usury  in  the  suits  brought  against  Hays  for  the 
Bishop's  debts,  upon  the  agreement  to  secure  Hays  the  one-half 
of  what  he  should  be  compelled  to  pay  for  him,  Doane,  and  to 
give  Hays  a  power-of-attorney  to  receive  one  thousand  dollars  a 
year  from  the  trustees  of  Mrs.  Doane;  and  then,  having  thus  pre- 
vented Hays  from  defending  himself  on  the  plea  of  usury,  turns 
round  and  defrauds  Hays,  by  allowing  his  step-son,  Edward  N. 
Perkins,  to  set  up  as  against  Hays  the  making  of  an  order  upon 
the  trustees  for  the  payment  of  this  very  money.  We  say  allowed 
him;  we  may  say,  further  enabled  him  to  prevent  Hays  from  re- 
ceiving the  stipulated  annual  payment.  Now  it  will  be  observed,  by 
turning  to  Appendix  IV,  that  the  agreement  entered  into  between 
George  VV.  Doane,  and  Eliza  Doane,  with  Michael  Hays,  by 
which  the  latter  was  to  receive  one  thousand  dollars  annually  from 
the  trustees  of  Mrs.  Doane,  bears  date  on  the  twentieth  of  August, 
eighteen  hundred  and  forty-nine,  and  the  power-of-attorney  to 
Hays,  on  the  thirtieth  of  October,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty- 
nine.  Could  it  be  believed,  that  any  man  of  common  hon- 
esty, could  lend  himself  or  unite  with  any  one  to  defeat  his  solemn  • 
agreement,  made  under  such  extraordinary  circumstances  ?  And 
yet  we  find  that  the  trustees  decline  the  payment  of  the  one  thou- 
sand dollars  to  Hays,  upon  the  ground  that  Bishop  Doane  had 
indorsed  to  Edward  N.  Perkins  an  order,  in  the  following 
words  i 


37 

Thomas  H.  Perkins  and  }  Executors  of  the  Will  of  the  late 

William  H.  Gardner,  Esq'rs,  )       James  Perkins,  Esquire. 

Pay  to  the  order  of  G.  W.  Doane,  fifteen  hundred  dollars,  being 
a  quarterly  payment  of  my  annuity  under  the  said  will,  due  this 
day.  Eliza  G.  Doane. 

Burlington,  1st  October,  1851. 

Pay  to  the  order  of  E.  N.  Perkins. 

G.  W.  Doane. 

Thus  it  appears  that  the  obstruction  to  Michael  Hays's  receiv- 
ing the  money,  under  his  agreement  with  the  Bishop  and  his  wife, 
is  this  order,  payable  to  the  Bishop  himself,  and  by  him  indorsed 
to  his  step-son,  Edward  N.  Perkins. 

Is  any  thing  wanting  to  add  to  the  grossness  of  this  fraud  and 
injustice  practised  on  Michael  Hays?  If  so,  we  might  find  it  in 
the  fact  disclosed  in  the  agreement  between  Eliza  G.  Doane  and 
Joseph  Deacon,  with  the  assent  and  entire  ratification  of  George 
W.  Doane,  in  Appendix  GG.  This  agreement  bears  date  four 
days  after  the  agreement  with  Hays,  and  it  stipulates  to  give 
Deacon  a  power-of-attorney  to  receive  of  the  executors  of  James 
Perkins  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars  annually,  on  the  first-  day 
of  January  in  each  year,  till  one-half  of  his  debt  is  paid.  But  this 
agreement  contains  this  significant  clause:  "Which  power-of-attor- 
ney the  said  Deacon  is  to  present  to  the  executors,  only  in  the  event 
of  G.  W.  Doane's  failing  to  pay  the  same." 

To  how  many  more  of  his  creditors  he  gave  similar  orders  to 
receive  money  of  the  executors  of  his  wife's  late  husband,  and 
how  many  more  have  been  prevented  from  receiving  their  mo- 
ney by  his  giving  subsequent  orders  in  favor  of  his  step-son,  we 
leave  our  readers  to  conjecture. 

Where  do  we  find,  in  the  examples  of  his  lowly  and  humble 
Master,  any  thing  to  warrant  such  conduct?  It  is  in  vain  for  a 
Bishop  of  the  Church  of  the  Redeemer  to  preach  eloquent  ser- 
mons, when  the  whole  course  of  his  life  gives  the  lie  to  his  pre- 
cepts. In  the  language  of  the  author  of  "New  Themes  for  the 
Protestant  Clergy,"  "  There  is  nothing  now  so  much  needed  by 
Christianity,  as  an  earnest  exemplification  of  Christ's  teachings. 
This  would  preach  louder  than  a  thousand  voices.  This  would 
l>e  more  eloquent  than  ten  thousand  volumes.     This  would  carry 


38 


conviction  where  no  human  instrumentality  could  ever  penetrate.''' 
We  do  not  deny  that  an  infinitely  merciful  and  infinitely  powerful 
Creator  may  make  use  of  a  wicked  instrument  to  produce  good, 
and  that  a  meek  and  inquiring  mind  may,  through  the  Divine 
grace,  derive  hope  and  consolation  from  the  words  of  truth 
preached  even  by  profane  lips,  as  our  Creator  made  use  of  the 
raven,  an  unclean  bird,  to  feed  his  Prophet,  Elijah.  Yet  these  may 
be  considered  as  exceptions  to  the  ordinary  operations  of  the 
Spirit,  who  usually  works  by  means.  The  maxim  given  by  Horace, 
in  relation  to  the  art  of  speaking,  is  founded  in  nature,  and  is 
equally  applicable  to  religion  : 

"  Si  vis  me  flere  flendum  est  tibi." 

And  so,  if  the  preacher  wishes  his  hearers  to  be  religious,  the  most 
efficacious  way  to  convert  them,  is  to  set  them  a  holy  example. 
But  we  need  not  refer  to  profane  authority,  on  this  subject,  when 
we  have  the  authority  of  the  sweet  Psalmist  of  Israel.  To  the 
questions,  "  Who  shall  ascend  into  the  hill  of  the  Lord,  and  who 
shall  stand  in  His  holy  place  V*  he  answers :  "  He  that  hath  clean 
hands  and  a  pure  heart;  who  hath  not  lifted  up  his  hand  unto 
vanity,  nor  sworn  deceitfully" 

Specification  XIX. 

This  is  proved  by  the  pamphlet  of  Mr.  Binney,  which  the  In- 
vestigating Committee,  or  rather  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese 
of  New  Jersey,  directed  to  be  laid  before  the  Court  of  Bishops. 

Mr.  Binney  (on  page  20  of  said  pamphlet,  in  his  letter  of  17th 
May,  1847,)  expressly  says,  "I  am  not  a  subscriber  to  the  new 
Church  edifice,  and  have  never  authorised  any  person  to  subscribe 
mv  name,  or  represent  me  as  a  subscriber  to  it." 

Now,  does  Bishop  Doane  in  his  own  statement  of  what  occur- 
red between  him  and  Mr.  Binney,  contradict  in  anyway  lhat  Mr. 
Binney  did  not  authorise  him  to  subscribe  his  name?  (See  Bish- 
op Doane's  letter  of  2Slh  May  1847,  jiage  27  of  Mr.  Binnei/s 
pamphlet.) 

It  is  to  be  remarked,  Bishop  Doane  does  not  pretend  that  he 
asked  Mr.  Binney's  permission  to  subscribe  his  name,  but  if  he 
might  use  it,  and  the  reply  was,  "certainly,  with  the  understand- 
ing I  have  stated." 


39 

Now  it  is  apparent  that  when  Bishop  Doane  put  the  question  to 
Mr.  Binney  and  requested  permission  to  use  his  name,  he  did  not 
intend  to  be  understood  by  Mr.  Binney  as  asking  liberty  to  sub- 
scribe it.  If  that  was  his  object,  why  not  make  use  of  the  word 
subscribe  ?  Why  make  use  of  the  ambiguous  term  use  ?  But 
again,  why  ask  leave  to  subscribe  Air.  Binney's  name  ?  Mr.  Bin- 
ney was  able  and  always  in  the  practice  of  subscribing  his  own 
name.  If  he  had  been  guilty  of  the  folly  and  impudence  to 
have  asked  Mr.  Binney  for  permission  to  subscribe  his  name,  what 
would  have  been  Mr.  Binney's  answer  ?  Would  it  not  have  been, 
Sir,  I  can  sign  my  own  name  when  I  think  proper. 

Every  other  name  on  that  subscription,  at  that  time,  was  an 
autograph ;  why  should  not  Mr.  Binney  have  the  privilege  of  put- 
ting his  autograph?  Was  there  any  such  intimate  confidence 
subsisting  between  Mr.  Binney  and  himself  as  to  authorise  such 
an  extraordinary  request  1  None  is  shewn.  He  dare  not,  therefore , 
ask  permission  to  subscribe  his  (Mr.  Binney's)  name ;  he  did  not 
do  it.  And  if  at  the  time  he  asked  permission  to  use  Mr.  Binney's 
name  he  intended  to  construe  it  as  synonymous  with  the  word 
subscribe,  then  it  was  a  deception  on  Mr.  Binney. 

The  construction  which  Bishop  Doane  gives  Mr.  Binney's 
words,  is  in  direct  violation  of  that  rule  of  construction  laid  down 
by  Dr.  Paley,  who  tells  us  that  when  the  terms  of  a  promise  ad- 
mit of  more  senses  than  one,  the  promise  is  to  be  performed  in 
that  sense  in  which  the  promisor  apprehended  at  the  time  that  the 
promisee,  or  person  to  whom  the  promise  was  made,  received  it. 
Paley,  Mor.  Phil.  99. 

The  question  is  not,  therefore,  what  meaning  did  Bishop  Doane 
attach  to  the  word  use,  when  he  put  the  question,  but  w7hat  mean- 
ing did  Bishop  Doane  suppose  that  Mr.  Binney  attached  to  it  when 
he  gave  the  answer. 

Did  Bishop  Doane  suppose  that  Mr.  Binney  understood  him  to 
ask  his  permission  to  write  an  unconditional  subscription  to  that 
paper?  Does  Bishop  Doane  any  where  pretend  or  assert  fhat  he 
supposed  Mr.  Binney  so  understood  the  permission  he  gave  ? 

The  most  that  he  says,  is,  "  I  entered  his  name  upon  a  clear 
understanding  that  he  authorised  me  to  do  so." 

This  allegation  Mr.  Binney  shows  to  be  clearly  and  utterly  false. 


40 

But  to  come  back  to  the  Bishop's  statement  of  the  conversa- 
tion. He  from  that  undertakes  to  prove  his  authority,  and  he 
says  that  this  statement  contains  admissions  by  Mr.  Birmey  which 
warrant  the  use  of  his  name.  Now,  unfortunately  for  the  Bishop, 
his  own  statement  of  Mr.  Binney's  conversation  and  acts,  show 
that  there  is  no  such  admission.  It  shows  conclusively  that  Mr. 
Binney  not  only  did  not  authorise  him  to  subscribe,  but  that  Mr. 
Binney  had  the  paper  in  his  hand,  and  had  an  opportunity  to  sub- 
scribe it,  and  declined  it.  The  Bishop's  own  letter  is  sufficient 
to  condemn  him,  in  the  mind  of  any  intelligent,  judicious  man. 

Mr.  Binney,  in  his  reply  to  part  of  the  Report  of  the  Diocesan 
Convention  of  New  Jersey,  in  the  case  of  Bishop  Doane,  dated 
Philadelphia,  13th  December,  1852,  on  page  11  of  his  pamphlet, 
speaking  of  this  charge  of  the  Four  Laymen,  and  of  the  reply 
Bishop  Doane  gave  to  it  in  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  40. 
which  is  in  the  following  words:  "It  need  hardlv  be  said  that  the 
subscription  was  made  under  the  impression  that  it  was  author- 
ised by  Mr.  Binney.  If  it  were  not,  of  course  payment  would 
be  refused.     In  any  event,  it  could  confer  no  personal  advantage  * 

on  the  undersigned." 

After  reciting  this  reply,  Mr.  Binney  makes  the  following  re- 
marks: "And  this  is  the  whole  answer  of  Bishop  Doane  to  that 
charge;  a  charge  presented  against  the  Bishop,  imputing  to  him 
immorality,  a  corrupt  intention,  an  intentional  wrong;  and  it  is 
answered  by  Bishop  Doane  as  no  such  charge  was  ever  before 
answered  by  any  man. 

"If  any  one  will  go  back  to  Bishop  Doane's  letter  to  Thomas 
Milnor,  of  the  28th  May,  1847,  he  will  see,  without  my  prompt- 
ing, what  sort  of  corollary  this  answer  is  to  the  averments,  posi- 
tive and  circumstantial,  spread  over  the  five  closely  printed  pages 
of  that  letter;  positive,  explicit,  repeated  assertion  of  authority  •  • 

derived  from  me,  <  from  my  very  words,'  from  all  the  language 
and  circumstances  of  the  two  interviews  between  us,  the  second  - 
interview  purposely  sought  by  him,  '  with  iteration,'  to  make  as- 
surance doubly  sure,  and  the  authority  pertinaciously  asserted 
after  my  positive  denial,  and  declared  by  himself  to  have  been 
undoubtingly  exercised  in  the  subscription  of  my  name;  lie  will 
see  upon  so  going  back,  that  my  own  denial  was  denied,  my  ifs 


41 

pulled  out  by  the  roots,  and  Bishop  Doane's  buts  planted  in  their 
place,  the  condition  expressly  annexed  by  me  to  the  promise  of 
future  aid,  that  the  Church  should  be  built  according  to  a  plan 
that  I  should  approve  of,  oenied,  and  also  derided  as  a  venal  ex- 
ception from  all  the  liberality  he  had  met  with  in  obtaining  more 
than  thirteen  thousand  dollars;  this,  and  all  this,  the  reader  will 
find  by  going  back  to  that  letter.  It  is  the  letter  of  Bishop  Doane 
to  Thomas  Milnor,  and  nothing  but  the  letter.  And  now  the  re- 
ply of  Bishop  Doane  to  this  charge  of  immorality,  given  by  him 
in  the  face  of  an  overhanging  presentment,  is  this,  and  only  this: 
*  It  need  hardly  be  said,  that  the  subscription  was  made  under  the 
impression  that  it  was  authorised  by  Mr.  Binney.'  '  It  need  hardly 
be  said  /'  Why,  it  was  the  thing  of  things  that  did  need  to  be  said, 
plainly  and  explicitly,  affirmatively  and  emphatically,  beyond  and 
before  all  other  things,  in  preference  and  substitution  of  all  other 
things.  It  did  need  to  be  said,  as  the  only  answer  to  the  charge 
of  immorality,  if  he  did  not  assert  my  authority  for  the  act,  and 
the  sufficient  one,  if  he  said  nothing  about  my  grant  of  authority. 
It  did  need  to  be  said,  not  only  from  the  course  I  had  taken  in  my 
printed  remarks  upon  the  very  point  of  his  sincerity  and  belief, 
but  because,  by  not  saying  so,  or  by  saying  what  he  has  said,  he 
has  not  confessed  and  avoided,  traversed  or  denied  any  thing  that 
is  contained  in  the  charge.  He  has  simply  avoided  saying  any- 
thing about  it.  He  does  not  deny  the  charge  at  all.  He  does  not 
assert  the  authority  at  all.  He  does  not  assert  his  impressions  of 
such  an  authority.  He  says  only — 'it  need  hardly  be  said.'  He 
stands  mute  to  the  understanding  of  the  reader.  He  stands  mute 
to  his  own  memory.  He  flourishes  a  foil,  and  does  no  more.  Was 
the  like  of  this  ever  seen  before,  in  answer  to  an  accusation  of 
immorality.  Would  any  calm,  clear,  self-supported  man,  in  the 
presence  of  such  a  charge,  so  easily  disavowed  if  the  impeach- 
ment of  it  was  unjust,  resort  to  a  form  of  answer,  which,  in  the 
understanding  of  all  men,  is  either  an  intentional  evasion  of  a  di- 
ed answer,  or  the  affectation  of  raising  the  respondent  above 
'\e  possibility  of  accusation,  even  while  he  has  the  accusation 
before  his  eyes." 


42 

Specification  XX. 

This  specification  is  that  the  subscriptions  which  Bishop  Doane 
procured  were  conditional.  It  is  proved,  that  in  subscribing  for 
the  new  church,  several  persons,  viz.,  Mrs.  Wall,  Mrs.  Brad- 
ford, and  others,  "  at  the  Bishop's  suggestion,  subscribed  the 
amount  of  their  certificates  of  stock  in  St.  Mary's  Hall,  which  the 
Bishop  received  as  cash  on  the  subscription  for  the  new  church, 
and  afterwards  the  Bishop  cashed  the  certificates ;  that  the  sub- 
scriptions were  made  in  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-five,  and  the 
subscriptions  were  paid  by  the  Bishop  in  eighteen  hundred  forty- 
seven  and  eight.  (Report  of  Investigating  Com.,  page  80  and  97.) 
(See  Mr.  Binnefs  Pamphlet,  page  75-6.) 

Now,  the  charge  against  Bishop  Doane  is  that  he  asserts  that 
the  whole  of  the  subscriptions,  amounting  to  thirteen  thousand 
dollars,  were  unconditional;  that  is,  to  use  his  language,  "without 
condition,  or  the  slightest  claim  for  equivalent."  If  this  means 
any  thing,  it  means  that  the  subscriptions  were  to  be  paid  by  the 
subscribers,  absolutely  and  in  money.  Whereas,  it  appears  that 
the  subscribers  were  not  to  pay  money  at  all,  but  only  a  certificate 
of  stock  in  the  school,  which  was  worthless  to  them,  and  for 
which  they  never  probably  expected  to  get  one  cent.  The  schools 
were  mortgaged  for  more  than  they  were  worth,  consequently  the 
certificates  were  good  for  nothing.  But  it  is  said  Bishop  Doane 
paid  them.  This  is  a  mere  pretence.  If  he  did,  he  took  the 
money  of  his  creditors  to  do  it.  But  what  right  had  he  to  do  it. 
In  so  doing,  he  committed  a  double  fraud.  He  defrauded  those 
persons  whom  he  induced  to  pay  cash,  under  the  idea  that  all 
these  persons  who  were  subscribing  this  worthless  stock  in  the 
schools,  were  paying  cash.  And  in  the  next  place,  he  defrauded 
his  creditors,  by  taking  their  money  to  pay  for  these  worthless 
certificates.  Mr.  Milnor  says  he  paid  six  thousand  dollars  to  the 
church,  by  taking  up  these  certificates.  What  has  he  got,  or  what 
have  his  creditors  got,  to  show  for  these  six  thousand  dollars? 
Nothing.  The  schools  brought  no  more,  in  consequence  of  the 
payment  of  this  money  ;  and  the  creditors,  therefore,  by  this  opera- 
tion, lost  six  thousand  dollars,  for  it  came  out  of  their  pockets. 
The  certificates  are  worthless.  The  subscription  calls  for  the  pay- 
ment of  the  sums  thereto  subscribed,  unconditionally. 


43 

This  brings  us  to  another  aspect  of  the  case.  This  subscrip- 
tion to  the  church  was  made,  it  is  said,  in  eighteen  hundred  and 
forty-five.  He  was  then  indebted  in  upwards  of  two  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars.  (See  Subscription  Paper,  Binney's  Pamphlet,  p.  34.) 
What  right  had  he  to  embark  in  an  enterprise  wholly  unnecessary, 
(a  mere  work  of  ostentation,  as  his  old  church  was  large  enough 
to  accommodate  all  his  hearers.)  What  right  had  he  to  embark 
in  an  enterprise,  which  could  not  get  on  without  his  taking  six 
thousand  dollars  more  of  property,  that  did  not  belong  to  him,  to 
start  it.  The  end  don't  justify  the  means,  and  therefore,  although 
his  object  was  to  build  a  church,  he  was  not  authorised  to  defraud 
his  creditors  out  of  the  money  to  do  it  with.  But  it  appears  that 
the  subscriptions  were  made  in  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-five, 
(See  Thos.  Milnor's  testimony,  page  97,  Report  of  Investigating 
Committee,)  and  he  did  not  pay  them  until  eighteen  hundred  and 
forty-seven,  or  that  he  paid  about  six  thousand  dollars  of  these 
subscriptions,  and  it  appears,  by  Germain's  testimony,  that  he 
mortgaged  the  schools  for  thirteen  thousand  five  hundred  dollars, 
to  Parker,  Wright,  and  others.  (See  page  80,  ibid.)  This  is  a 
new  way  to  pay  old  debts. 

Germain,  on  page  80  of  his  testimony,  says,  "  The  Bishop  af- 
terwards redeemed  the  balance  of  the  slock  of  St.  Mary's  Hall, 
took  a  deed  for  the  same  in  fee  simple,  from  G.  D.  Wall,  H.  C. 
Carey,  and  Wm.  J.  Watson,  who  held  the  same  in  trust,  and 
subsequently  mortgaged  it  to  Isaac  B.  Parker,  William  Wright, 
and  others,  for  thirteen  thousand  five  hundred  dollars." 

This  gives  us  the  explanation  of  the  reason  why  the  Bishop 
was  willing  to  advance  the  money  for  these  certificates  to  the 
amount  of  six  thousand  dollars.  But  it  does  not  give  the  whole 
amount  he  borrowed  on  the  property. 

The  facts  are  these :  The  deed  from  Wall  and  others  to  Doane 
was  dated  12th  March,  1847,  and  recorded  7th  April,  1847,  (Ap- 
pendix 1L)  and  the  mortgage  to  Isaac  B.  Parker  and  others  bears 
date  on  the  15th*of  April,  1847,  only  eight  days  after  the  deed  was 
recorded.  (Appendix  0.)  And  it  must  be  perfectly  apparent  that 
the  negotiation  for  the  loan  of  the  thirteen  thousand  five  hundred 
dollars  must  have  been  made  before  he  got  the  title  from  Wall 
and  others ;  for  the  persons  named  in  the  mortgage,  and  who  loaned 


44 

the  money,  lived  in  different  and  distant  parts  of  the  state,  viz., 
one  in  Princeton,  one  in  Rahway,  three  in  Newark,  and  one  in 
Burlington. 

He  also,  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  March,  eighteen  hundred  and 
forty-seven,  only  three  days  after  the  date  of  the  deed  from  Wall 
and  others  to  G.  W.  Doane,  mortgaged  the  same  property  to  Jo- 
seph Deacon  for  eight  thousand  dollars;  and  this  mortgage  is  re- 
corded on  the  seventh  of  April,  the  same  day  that  the  deed  was 
recorded.     (Appendix  N.) 

It  is  manifest,  therefore,  that  the  payment  of  six  thousand  dol- 
lars for  these  certificates,  was  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  the  title 
to  the  St.  Mary's  Hall  property,  so  that  he  might  mortgage  it  for 
twenty-one  thousand  five  hundred  dollars;  and  even  part  of  this 
sum  of  six  thousand  dollars,  was  not  paid  until  the  year  eighteen 
hundred  and  forty-eight,  a  year  after  he  had  realized  the  money 
on  the  mortgages,  as  appears  by  the  evidence  of  Thomas  Milnor, 
page  97  of  the  evidence  before  the  Committee  of  Investigation. 

But  the  Committee  of  Investigation  undertook  to  investigate  this 
charge,  and  they  made  a  report  upon  it.  We  take  the  liberty  of 
quoting  from  Mr.  Binney's  reply  to  this  report,  from  which  the 
reader  will  see  what  kind  of  reliance  can  be  placed  upon  their 
ex  parte  whitewashing  report,  which  hns  been  trumpeted  abroad, 
as  having  been  made  by  such  high-minded  and  honorable  men. 
Mr.  Binney  quotes  from  the  Report  of  the  Committee  certain  por- 
tions of  it,  to  which  he  annexes  his  reply.    We  quote  from  page  22. 

This  part  of  the  report  begins  as  follows  :  "[Journal,  July,  1852, 
page  18.]  "Specification  3.  Your  committee  herewith  submit 
to  the  Convention,  as  a  part  of  their  evidence,  a  pamphlet  of  Mr. 
Binney's,  published  by  him  in  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-six,  in 
which  the  whole  controversy  between  him  and  the  Bishop  is  fully 
stated.  This  is  all  the  evidence  the  committee  have,  bearing  upon 
the  third  Specification." 

"The  pamphlet  was  not  published,  and  it  was  not  even  printed 
in  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-six,  but  in  eighteen  hundred  and 
forty-nine.  [Pamphlet,  title-page,  and  preface,  page  3.]  This, 
however,  may  be  a  mere  mistake  or  misprint. 

"'In  that  pamphlet,  it  will  be  seen,  by  the  statement  of  both, 
ihat  the  Bishop  applied  to  Mr.  Binney  for  a  subscription  towards 


45 

the  building  of  a  new  church  at  Burlington,  where  Mr.  Binney 
then  resided  for  a  portion  oftyris  time.' 

"  In  that  pamphlet  this  fact  will  not  be  seen,  by  the  statement 
of  both.  The  Bishop  asserted  that  he  made  no  such  application* 
[Pamphlet,  page  26,  line  36  from  the  top.~\  I  noticed  the  asser- 
tion, and  made  a  distinct  comment  upon  his  motive  for  it,  and  re- 
futed it  upon  page  59  of  the  pamphlet,  occupying  three-fourths  of 
the  page  with  that  subject.  "  Mr.  Binney  states  that  he  replied  to 
the  application,  that  he  would  give  one  thousand  dollars,  upon  the 
condition  that  a  certain  plan  of  his  for  raising  and  applying  the 
money,  and  for  the  disposition  of  the  building,  after  it  was  finished, 
to  be  prepared  by  him,  should  be  adopted.', 

"  Mr.  Binney  states  no  such  thing  in  the  pamphlet.  His  reply 
did  not  contain  one  word  of  a  certain  plan  of  his,  to  be  prepared 
by  him.  He  stated  no  certain  plan ;  he  referred  to  no  certain 
plan.  The  pamphlet  states,  that  he  said,  "  Bishop,  I  approve  of 
the  object,  but  I  cannot  sign  a  paper  of  this  description,  which 
contains  no  detail  of  plan  ;  I  shall  be  happy  to  contribute  a  thou- 
sand dollars  to  the  object,  if  it  is  to  be  built  according  to  a  plan 
which  I  shall  approve.  The  Bishop  then  remarked,  that  he 
should  be  happy  to  know  what  my  plan  was;  to  which  I  an- 
swered, that  I  would  take  my  leisure  to  draw  up  a  plan,  and  send 
it  to  him."  [Pamphlet,  p.  13.]  "  The  Bishop  states  that  he  re- 
plied that  he  would  give  one  thousand  dollars,  and  offered  also  to 
submit  the  said  plan."  The  Bishop  makes  no  such  statement  in 
the  pamphlet.  The  language  of  the  Bishop,  as  he  states  it,  was, 
1  I  added,  making  no  application  to  him  for  a  subscription,  I  have 
brought  this  paper  tc  you,  sir,  to  show  you  what  has  been  done. 
He  read  the  heading  and  names,  and  said,  «  Why,  you  have  be- 
gun strong ;'  I  replied,  *  Yes,  sir,  and  we  mean  to  go  on  strong.' 
He  considered  for  a  moment,  and  then,  without  further  remark 
on  my  part,  or  on  his,  said,  '  Yes,  I  will  contribute  a  thousand 
dollars  toward  it,  but  I  shall  wish  to  give  you  a  plan.'  [Pam- 
phlet, p.  26.]  The  Committee  do  not  come  as  near  to  me  as  the 
Bishop  himself. 

"  '  Mr.  Binney  says  he  authorised  the  Bishop  to  use  his  name, 
coupled  with  the  condition  as  he  states  it.' 

"  Mr.  Binney  says  no  such  thing  in   any  part  of  the  pamphlet. 


46 

The  words,  conveying  authority  to  use  my  name,  were,  on  the 
contrary,  one  of  the  main  hinges  of  the  controversy.  The  pam- 
phlet expressly  gives  my  words,  [pamphlet,  page  61,  near  the 
bottom^]  and  both  denies  the  words  stated  by  the  Committee,  and 
sets  forth  my  own,  which  did  not  contain  a  single  word  in  regard 
to  the  use  of  my  name,  and  refutes  Bishop  Doane's  allegations 
concerning  his  alledged  permission  to  use  my  name,  in  pages  62, 
63,  64,  65,  66.  I  took  pains  enough,  certainly,  to  say  and  to  show 
also,  that  I  did  not  authorise  Bishop  Doane  to  use  my  name  with 
or  without  condition.  '  And  the  Bishop  says  he  authorised  him 
to  use  his  name,  adding,  that  he  would  submit  a  plan.'  The  Bish- 
op does  not  say  so.  The  Committee  have  put  together  parts  of 
Bishop  Doane's  statements  of  the  two  interviews,  leaving  out  of 
each  statement  a  part  that  falsifies  the  whole.  The  words  in  the 
first  interview  contain  no  allusion  to  the  use  of  my  name.  [Pam- 
phlet, p.  26.]  The  words  in  the  second  interview,  as  the  Bishop 
states  them,  were  these  :  '  I  returned  with  these  very  words,  '  Do 
I  understand  you,  sir,  that  I  am  at  liberty  to  use  your  name.* 
The  reply  was,  and  there  was  no  emphatic  pause  to  make  it 
questionable,  <  Certainly,  with  the  understanding  I  have  stated.' 
[Pamphlet,  p.  27.J  Not  a  word  about  submitting  a  plan.  So 
that  the  Committee  are  again  further  from  me  than  the  Bishop. 

" '  They  both  agree  that  the  Bishop  was  authorised  to  use  Mr. 
Binney's  name  as  a  subscriber  for  one  thousand  dollars.  But 
they  differ  as  to  the  nature  and  application  of  the  condition.' 
'  They  both  agree.'  This  is  gross,  palpable,  and  inexcusable. 
The  whole  strain  of  my  reply  to  the  copy  of  Bishop  Doane's  let- 
ter to  Thomas  Milnor,  and  the  whole  scope  of  my  remarks  in 
that  pamphlet,  from  the  beginning  to  the  end,  are  in  open,  direct, 
and  irreconcilable  contradiction  to  this  statement  of  the  Commit- 
tee. Instead  of  its  being  the  agreement  of  both,  it  is  the  state- 
ment of  neither.  Bishop  Doane  had  not  the  temerity  to  state  in 
any  part  of  his  letter,  that  I  agreed  he  might  use  my  name  as  a 
subscriber." 

"  He  stated  in  his  letter  to  Thomas  Milnor,  his  question  to  me, 
*  Do  I  understand  you,  Sir,  that  I  am  at  liberty  to  use  your  name  V 
and  then  followed  his  remark  about  my  not  pausing,  and  the  an- 
swer he  attributed  to  me,  which  I  have  set  out  in  the  preceding 


- 


47     . 

paragraph;  and  in  regard  to  that,  and  to  all  the  words  he  at- 
tributed to  me  or  to  himself,  ±  said  in  my  reply  to  Thomas  Milnor, 
of  June  5,  1847,  that  "  the  words,  manner,  tone,  beginning,  middle 
and  ending  of  the  conversation,  as  stated  by  him,  are  mis-state- 
ments ;"  that  "  they  are  not  the  facts."  [Pamphlet,  page  29.]  And 
now  the  committee  have  made  me  agree  that  I  authorised  Bishop 
Doane  to  use  my  name  as  a  subscriber,  and  have  made  our  con- 
troversy a  quibble,  and  a  feat  of  hair  splitting.  I  could  not  have 
treated  those  gentlemen,  or  any  body,  in  such  a  way.  I  protest 
against  this  with  my  whole  heart.  If  they  were  not  men  of  char- 
acter, I  should  say  that  they  had  done  it  of  malice  aforethought — 
that  they  must  have  thought  themselves  at  liberty  to  consider  the 
controversy  as  perfectly  open  to  the  coloring  and  fore-shortening 
that  are  so  licentiously  used  in  political  controversy — and  that  if 
they  have  done  the  like  as  to  the  other  accusations  against  Bishop 
Doane,  then  that  their  report  has  not  and  ought  not  to  have  the 
weight  of  a  feather  in  exculpation  of  Bishop  Doane.  But  being 
men  of  character,  I  cannot  say  any  of  these  things ;  but  I  do  say, 
and  aver  that  they  have  not  read  the  pamphlet,  which. was  "all 
the  evidence  the  committee  have."  Let  them  prove  the  contrary 
if  they  can." 

Specification  XXI. 

This  specification  is  proved  by  William  Munsig's  affidavit. 
(See  Appendix,  letter  BB.) 

Specification  XXII. 
This  is  not  one  of  the  original  charges  of  the  Four  Laymen, 
but  is  one  of  which  the  Three  Bishops  obtained  such  evidence  as 
satisfied  them  of  the  truth  of  the  charge.  But  as  the  Four  Lay- 
men are  unacquainted  with  Mrs.  Lippincott,  and  as  she  resides 
out  of  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  and  they  have  no  power  to  com- 
pel her  to  testify,  and  is  the  lady  who  Bishop  Doane  tells  us  was 
so  intimate  with  him  that  "  she  had  an  intimate  acquaintance  with 
all  his  business  transactions,"  we  have  not  thought  it  worth  while 
to  attempt  to  obtain  her  testimony. 

Specification  XXIII. 
This  is  not  one  of  the  original  charges  of  the  Four  Laymen ; 
it  is  one  made  by  the  Three  Bishops,  upon  the  representations  of 


48 


the  Rev.  Henry  B.  Sherman,  and  we  have  no  doubt  of  its  trutn. 
and  that  Mr.  Sherman  will  prove  it  whenever  he  is  legally  or 
canonically  called  upon  so  to  do. 

Specification  XXIV. 

The  charge  is  that  he  repeatedly  drew  and  delivered  in  pay- 
ment of  moneys  that  he  owed  or  obtained,  checks  on  banks,  when 
he  had  no  funds  in  said  banks.  The  latter  is  an  indictable  offence, 
if  at  the  time  he  drew  the  check,  he  knew  he  had  no  money  there. 

In  the  case  of  Rex  vs.  Jackson,  decided  by  Bayley,  Justice,  in 
1813,  Bayley  says :  This  point  has  recently  been  before  the  judges; 
and  they  are  all  of  opinion,  that  it  is  an  indictable  offence,  fraudu- 
lently to  obtain  money  by  giving  in  payment  a  check  upon  a 
banker  with  whom  the  party  keeps  no  account,  and  which  he 
knows  will  not  be  paid.     3  Camp,  JV.  P.  Rep.  370. 

In  the  case  of  the  Commonwealth  vs.  Drew,  (19  Pickering, 
Rep.  186,)  Morton,  Justice,  says:  If  the  drawer  passes  a  check 
to  a  third  person,  the  language  of  the  act  is  that  it  is  good,  and 
will  be  honored.  And  in  such  case,  if  he  knew  that  he  had  neither 
funds  or  credit,  it  would  probably  be  holden  to  be  a  false  pretence. 

In  the  case  of  True  vs.  Thomas,  (16  Maine  Rep.  36,)  it  is  de- 
cided, that  if  a  maker  of  a  check,  payable  instantly,  have  no  funds 
in  bank  at  the  time,  it  is  a  fraud. 

So  decided,  also,  in  Rex  vs.  Troth,  (2  Rossell  on  Crimes,  6 
Ed.,  295-30. 

Rex  vs.  Parker,  2  Moore,  Rep.  1.     7  Car  and  Paijn,  825. 

Tins  specification  is  proved  by  Michael  Hays's  and  Joseph 
Deacon's  affidavits,  (Appendix  R  and  DD,)  and  by  the  evidence 
of  George  Gaskill.     (Evidence  of  Investigation  Committee,  p.  85.) 

That  his  transactions  of  the  character  stated  in  the  charge, 
as  having  been  had  wiih  the  Princeton  Bank,  amounted  to  the 
sum  of  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight  thousand  dollars,  we  have 
from  Bishop  M'llvaine,  who  examined  the  books  of  the  Prince- 
ton Bank.  This  last  part  of  the  twenty-fourth  Specification  was 
no  part  of  the  original  charge  of  the  laymen,  and  it  rests  upon  the 
veracity  of  Bishop  M'llvaine,  which  is  amply  sufficient  to  sustain  it. 

It  is  well  known  to  business  men  that  the  Cashiers  of  Banks 
are  not  allowed  to  volunteer  to  testify  in  regard  to  the  transac- 


49 

tions  of  Banks,  nor  to  divulge  the  state  of  the  accounts  of  indi- 
viduals without  the  consent  of  the  Directors.  It  is  impossible, 
therefore,  for  us  to  obtain  the'  evidence,  at  this  time,  to  establish 
many  of  the  transactions  with  the  different  Banks  mentioned  in 
this  specification,  which  would  have  been  proved  by  the  Cashiers 
of  those  Banks  if  they  had  been  sworn  to  testify  the  truth  before 
the  Court  of  Bishops.  And  in  addition  to  the  Banks  mentioned 
in  this  specification,  it  could  have  been  proved,  as  we  have  been 
informed  by  undoubted  authority,  that  Bishop  Doane  drew  a  check 
for  the  amount  of  one  thousand  dollars  on  the  Bank  of  North 
America,  in  Philadelphia,  when  he  had  no  money  in  said  Bank, 
and  had  never  kept  any  account  there. 

Specification  XXV. 

That  he  induced  Michael  Hays  to  violate  the  law  by  taking 
usurious  interest.     This  is  proved  by  George  Gaskill. 

The  charge  is,  that  he  paid  twenty  per  cent*  for  indorsements. 
Now  if  it  was  against  law  for  Hays  to  do  this,  then  the  enor- 
mous premium  of  twenty  per  cent-,  must  have  been  a  great  in- 
ducement to  break  the  law,  and  he  was  leading  Hays  into  temp- 
tation; and  thus  in  the  daily  practice  of  doing  that  to  others 
which  he  was  in  daily  practice  of  praying  should  not  be  done  to 
himself;  that  is,  leading  his  friend  and  neighbor  "into  tempta- 
tion" How  can  a  man  expect  to  be  kept  from  temptation  him- 
self who  is  continually  leading  others  into  temptation  ? 

But  he  was  very  generous  in  paying  so  large  a  premium ;  he 
certainly  possesses  generosity  in  a  high  degree,  but  it  is  a  gene- 
rosity very  common  now-a-days,  and  which  consists  in  giving 
away  other  people's  property.  We  have  an  illustrious  instance 
of  this  kind  of  generosity  recorded  by  St.  Matthew,  who  tells 
"  that  the  devil  took  our  Savior  up  into  an  exceeding  high  moun- 
tain and  sheweth  him  all  the  kingdoms  of  the  world,  and  the  glory 
of  them,  and  saith  unto  him,  all  these  things  will  I  give  thee  if 
thou  wilt  fall  down  and  worship  me."  This  is  certainly  very  ex- 
traordinary generosity  in  a  poor  devil  who  had  not  a  foot  of  land 
he  could  call  his  own.  Well,  this  is  exactly  the  kind  of  generos- 
ity Bishop  Doane  has  been  exercising  for  the  last  ten  years,  and 
this  is  one  of  the  charges  to  which  Bishop  Doane,  in  his  confes- 

D 


50 

sion,  pleads  guilty,  for  he  says,  "  He  was  also  induced,  for  the 
sake  of  obtaining  money  to  meet  his  necessities,  to  resort  to 
methods  by  the  payment  of  exorbitant  interest  on  loans,  which 
he  did  not  suppose  was  in  contravention  of  the  law,  and  which 
common  usage  seemed  to  him  to  justify." 

Specification  XXVI. 

This  specification  is  fully  proved  by  Joseph  Deacon's  affidavit. 
{Appendix  R.) 

Specification  XXVII. 

That  the  articles  were  put  down  less  than  their  value,  requires 
no  proof;  it  is  apparent  from  the  inspection  of  the  list  itself.  (See 
Appendix  C.) 

The  plate  is  only  put  down  at  three  hundred  dollars,  whereas 
it  consisted  of  an  elegant  and  complete  tea  set,  worth  perhaps  one 
thousand  dollars,  besides  various  silver  waiters,  dinner  pieces, 
silver  spoons,  silver  desert  knives,  &c,  and  was  worth  probably 
over  two  thousand  dollars. 

Household  linen  is  put  down  at  sixty  dollars,  when  it  was  pro- 
bably worth  more  than  six  hundred  dollars;  his  table  covers  being 
worth,  probably,  the  whole  amount  of  the  valuation.  Twenty-one 
piano-fortes  at  but  thirty  dollars  a  piece,  and  all  other  articles  in 
proportion. 

Though  he  charged  each  pupil  six  dollars  per  term  for  the  use  of 
beds,  bedsteads  and  towels,  (see  Prospectus,  Appendix  KK,)  yet 
the  whole  estimated  value  of  those  articles  is  only  one  thousand  one 
hundred  and  seventy-seven  dollars  and  fifty  cents.  (See  Assignment, 
Appendix  C.)  In  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-eight  and  nine,  he  had 
at  St.  Mary's  Hall,  one  hundred  and  fifty-nine  scholars,  which  is 
equal  to  nineteen  hundred  dollars  interest  on  a  principal  of  eleven 
hundred  and  seventy-seven  dollars  and  fifty  cents;  that  is,  he  was  % 

receiving  an  interest  upon  upwards  of  twenty-eight  thousand  dol- 
lars, for  what  was  worth  (according  to  his  own  valuation,  under 
oath,)  eleven  hundred  and  seventy-seven  dollars  and  fifty  cents. 

He  swore  "  it  was  a  true  and  perfect  inventory  and  value,  as 
near  as  he  could  ascertain."  This  is  untrue.  He  might  have  as- 
certained, from  the  bills  of  the  venders,  or  from  the  venders  them- 
selves, what  they  were  worth;  but  he  did  not  take  the  trouble  to 
inquire. 


51 

This  charge  and  the  next  is,  substantially,  a  charge  of  false 
swearing,  or  what,  in  the  eye  of  religion,  is  equally  criminal, 
swearing  deceitfully.  The  Psalmist  inquires,  Who  shall  ascend 
into  the  hill  of  the  Lord,  and  who  shall  stand  in  his  holy  place? 
And  the  answer  is,  He  that  hath  clean  hands  and  a  pure  heart; 
who  hath  not  lifted  up  his  soul  unto  vanity,  nor  sworn  deceitfully ; 
thus  clearly  indicating  that  he  who  had  sworn  deceitfully  was  un- 
worthy to  stand  in  the  holy  place  of  the  Lord,  in  his  holy  church. 

Lord  Mansfield  said — "  It  is  certainly  true,  that  a  man  may  be 
indicted  for  perjury,  in  swearing  that  he  believes  a  fact  to  be  true, 
which  he  knows  to  be  false."  Pedley's  Case,  1  Leach,  327.  2 
Russel  on  Crimes,  1st  Jim.  Ed.,  1783.     2  Chittijs  Crim.  Law,  305. 

And  in  the  case  of  the  Commonwealth  vs.  Cornish,  (6  Binney 
Rep.  249,)  Ch.  Justice  Tilghman,  that  distinguished  ornament  of  the 
Pennsylvania  bench,  says:  "There  is  corruption  in  undertaking 
to  swear  positively  to  a  thing  of  which  you  have  little  knowledge, 
and  which  you  may  know,  if  you  will  take  the  trouble  to  inquire. 
And  when  there  is  this  kind  of  corruption,  the  law  implies  malice. 
It  is  objected  that  it  may  be  of  dangerous  consequence,  if  wit- 
nesses are  convicted  forswearing  to  what  thev  believe  to  be  true. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  will  be  more  dangerous,  if  they  are  to  escape 
who  rashly  and  obstinately  persist  in  a  false  oath  in  a  matter  on 
which  they  will  not  inform  themselves." 

In  this  affidavit  he  swears  that  the  inventory  set  forth  the  true 
value  "  as  near  as  he  could  ascertain."  This  is  swearing  posi- 
tively. Now  did  he  attempt  to  ascertain  from  any  competent 
judge?  Did  he  not  know,  or  could  he  not  find  out  what  he  paid 
for  a  large  telescope,  worth  six  hundred  or  seven  hundred  dol- 
lars ?  Yet  it  is  not  put  down  in  the  inventory  at  all.  The  agent 
of  the  Trustees  was  about  buying  it  for  eighty  dollars,  when  a 
gentleman  at  once  bid  one  hundred  and  fifty  dollars ;  it  was  then 
bid  up  by  the  agent  to  two  hundred  dollars,  and  struck  off  instantly 

Did  he  not  know  what  his  silver  plate  was  worth  ?  Or  could 
he  not  ascertain  by  having  it  weighed  ?  It.  is  put  down  at  :hree 
hundred  dollars.  If  it  is  in  any  respect  equal  in  magnificence  to 
the  other  furniture  at  Riverside,  we  should  suppose  that  two  thou- 
sand dollars  would  be  a  small  estimate  of  its  value. 

In  the  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  29,  the  Bishcp  undertook  to 


52 

screen  himself  from  this  charge  by  mis-stating  that  he  took  this 
rash  oath  under  the  advice  of  Messrs.  Cannon  and  Aertson.  The 
futility  of  this  pretence  is  exposed  in  the  answer  of  the  four  lay- 
men, page  21,  and  is  therefore  now  abandoned  by  the  Bishop. 
And  in  in  his  confession,  the  pretext  of  advice  from  these  gentle- 
men is  expressly  repudiated,  for  he  says,  "  In  this  condition  of 
things,  being  entirely  left  alone  and  without  advice,  every  step 
which  he  advanced  involved  him  more  and  more  deeply  in  pecu- 
niarv  embarrassments." 

The  whole  of  the  personal  property,  consisting  of  all  the  fur- 
niture, fixtures,  libraries,  philosophical  and  chemical  apparatus^ 
beds,  bedding,  &c,  of  St.  Mary's  Hall  and  Burlington  College, 
together  with  all  the  magnificent  furniture  at  Riverside,  and  the 
splendid  library  of  the  Bishop,  was  only  valued  by  him  at  four- 
teen thousand  four  hundred  and  twenty-six  dollars. 

Specification*  XXVIII. 

This  specification  is  proved  thus  : 

1.  In  regard  to  the  omission  of  the  debt  due  the  Episcopal 
Convention,  it  is  not  only  proved  to  have  been  omitted,  but  to  have 
been  omitted  designedly.  In  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  32,  he 
admits  the  omission,  and  states,  by  way  of  excuse,  "  that  it  was  not 
regarded  as  an  ordinary  debt,  and  the  purpose,  from  the  first,  was 
entertained  to  provide  for  it  distinctly."  But  this  was  not  so 
small  a  debt  that  it  could  have  been  forgotten.  It  was  designedly 
suppressed,  because  it  had  been  taken  without  the  consent  of 
the  Convention,  and  had  been  so  long  concealed,  he  did  not  wish 
to  have  it  known. 

That  these  omissions  were  the  result  of  design,  and  not  of  ac- 
cident, will,  we  think,  be  apparent,  when  we  show  that  the  name 
of  almost  every  active  friend  of  Bishop  Doane,  who  was  in  the 
habit  of  taking  a  prominent  part  in  his  favor,  (with  one  or  two 
exceptions,)  were  omitted  in  his  list  of  creditors.  Thus  he  omit- 
ted the  names  of  the  following,  viz:  E.  B.  D.  Ogden,  John  J. 
Chetwood,  Joel  W.  Condit,  William  Wright,  Samuel  Meeker, 
Thomas  Miller,  George  P.  McCulloch,  Daniel  Babbit,  Nathan 
Thorp,  Charles  M.  Harker,  Richard  S.  Field,  Edward  B.  Crubb, 


53 

John  G.  Clarke,  Rev.  James  A.   Williams.     All  these  could  not 
have  been  omitted  by  accidert. 

2.  This  is  proved  by  E.  B.  D.  Ogden.  (Report  of  Committee, 
page  82.)  But  he  says  he  was  to  take  the  note  up,  and  the  Bishop 
thought  he  had.  The  only  consequence  of  this  would  be,  that  the 
Bishop  should  have  put  down  Judge  Ogden  as  a  creditor  instead 
of  the  Paterson  Bank.  But  the  Bishop  doubtless  had  a  good  reason 
for  omitting  the  name  of  Judge  Ogden  from  his  list  of  creditors,  as 
it  might  have  had  a  tendency  to  show  that  the  Judge's  activity 
and  exertion  was  not  quite  so  disinterested  as  it  might  otherwise 
be  supposed. 

3.  The  omission  of  the  Trenton  Banking  Company.  Why  was 
not  this  Bank  put  down  as  a  creditor?  The  pretence  set  up  is, 
that  the  note  was  indorsed  by  Thomas  Milnor,  and  is  set  down 
as  due  to  him.  This  excuse  is  unsatisfactory.  It  is  not  pretended 
that  Milnor  had  paid  it ;  then  why  set  it  down  to  him  ?  The  Bank 
held  it;  the  Bank  wTas  the  creditor,  not  Milnor  ;  and  the  law  re- 
quires a  true  list  of  all  the  creditors,  and  the  oath  says  it  is  a  true 
list.  Neither  could  this  have  occurred  by  mistake,  for  Mr.  Aert- 
son  says,  (see  Bishop's  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  32,)  "  State- 
ments were  obtained  from  the  several  Banks  and  individuals  with 
whom  paper  had  been  negotiated,  and  every  conceivable  mode 
adopted  to  make  it  as  perfect  as  possible." 

4.  It  omitted  the  names  of  David  McEvoy,  two  hundred  dol- 
lars, and  of  William  Woolman's  checks. 

The  form  of  the  oath  which  Bishop  Doane  took,  is,  "  That  the 
above  was  a  true,  full  and  perfect  list  of  all  his  creditors,  with  the 
amounts  severally  due  to  them,  as  far  as  he  hath  been  able  to  as- 
certain, according  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge."  It  is  not  ac- 
cording to  the  best  of  his  belief. 

These  affidavits  were  read  over  to  him,  and  he  is  not  so  ignorant 
as  not  to  understand  the  meaning  of  the  English  language,  nor  the 
nature  of  an  oath.  Now  he  swears  that  it  was  a  true  list  of  his 
creditors,  as  far  as  he  could  ascertain.  This  is  proved  to  be  false 
by  his  own  solemn  affirmation,  for  he  declares,  in  his  Protest  and 
Appeal,  page  41,  that  Mrs.  C.  Lippincott  was  most  intimately  ac- 
quainted with  all  "  the  business  risks  and  relations  of  the  under- 
signed,"    It  appears  then,  from  his  own  allegation,  that  he  could 


54 

have  ascertained  from  Mrs.  Lippincott  who  his  creditors  were, 
and  that,  with  her  assistance,  he  could  have  made  out  a  correct 
Jist;  and  when  he  failed  to  inquire  and  to  obtain  information  from 
an  authentic  source,  when  he  knew  such  information  could  be  ob- 
tained upon  application,  he  falls  clearly  within  the  spirit  and  let- 
ter of  the  decision  of  Chief  Justice  Tilghman,  in  the  case  of 
the  Commonwealth  vs.  Cornish,  where  he  says,  "There  is  cor-  , 
ruption  in  undertaking  to  swear  positively  to  a  thing  of  which  you 
have  little  knowledge,  and  which  you  may  know  if  you  take  the 
trouble  to  inquire." 

But  there  is  another  and  more  authentic  source  to  which  Bishop 
Doane  might  have  referred  if  he  had  desired  to  know  and  make 
out  a  full  list  of  his  creditors.  He  could  not  have  forgotten  that 
he  had  given  a  mortgage,  bearing  date  on  the  10th  of  June,  1848, 
to  Isaac  B.  Parker,  Thomas  Milnor,  Richard  S.  Field,  Jeremiah 
C.  Garthwaite,  and  Nathan  Thorp,  for  the  sum  of  fifty  thousand 
dollars,  and  therein  acknowledged  that  the  mortgage  was  given  to 
secure  the  same  to  the  following  persons,  "  who  have  loaned  to 
said  George  W.  Doane  the  sum  of  fifty  thousand  dollars,  as  by 
certificates  of  loan  issued  and  bearing  date  herewith  as  follows, 
viz."  Then  follow  the  names  which  the  Bishop  omits  to  put 
on  his  list ;  and  the  reason  of  which  omission  will,  we  think,  be 
perfectly  obvious  to  any  one  who  has  attended  the  Conventions  of 
this  Diocese,  and  seen  who  are  the  Bishop's  most  active  lay 
friends,  viz.,  William  Wright,  two  thousand  dollars ;  Nathan 
Thorp,  one  thousand  dollars;  John  J.  Chetwood,  one  thousand 
dollars;  Joel  W.  Condit,  one  thousand  dollars;  Samuel  Meeker, 
one  thousand  dollars;  George  P.  McCullocb,  three  hundred  and 
fifty  dollars;  William  J.  Watson,  five  hundred  dollars;  David 
Babbit,  M.  D.,  one  thousand  dollars;  Rev.  James  A.  Williams, 
one  thousand  dollars;  John  G.  Clarke,  three  hundred  dollars; 
Thomas  Hopkins  &  Son,  three  hundred  dollars ;  Daniel  Bennett, 
two  hundred  dollars ;  Barak  S.  Nichols,  two  hundred  and  fifty 
dollars. 

Can  any  one  believe  for  one  moment  that  the  Bishop's  memory 
was  so  oblivious,  as  to  forget  all  these  friends  of  his,  who  had 
stood  by  him  through  good  report  and  evil  report?  Could  he 
have  forgotten  the  Rev.  J.  A.  Williams,  from  whom  he  borrowed 


55 

the  one  thousand  dollars  belonging  to  the  fund  for  indigent  widows? 
Did  the  absorption  of  the  poor  widow's  mite  leave  no  trace  upon 
his  memory?     It  cannot  be  believed. 

Did  he  also  forget  his  liberal  friend,  the  Hon.  Richard  S.  Field, 
who,  in  April,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-seven,  loaned  him,  in 
connection  with  Isaac  B.  Parker  and  others,  one  thousand  dollars? 
Could  he  have  forgotten  this  gentleman  was  his  creditor,  "  under 
whose  auspices,  together  with  those  of  Judge  Ogden  and  Mr. 
Garthwaite,  it  was  announced  that  the  College  was  to  be  opened, 
in  May,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-nine"?  Credat  Judceus 
Appella, 

Of  the  debt  of  the  Princeton  Bank,  Aertson  in  his  testimony? 
page  109  of  investigating  report,  says :  "The  notes  in  the  Princeton 
Bank  were  included  either  under  the  head  of  notes  indorsed  by 
Deacon  and  Hays,  or  in  an  item  of  four  thousand  four  hundred 
and  forty-seven  dollars  and  thirty-six  cents.  But  as  it  regards  the 
note  of  the  Princeton  Bank,  it  was  indorsed  by  Germain,  and  not 
by  Hays  or  Deacon,  (see  Protest  and  Appeal,  p.  38.) 

If  it  is  included  in  the  notes  whose  "indorsers  are  uncertain," 
that  is  no  reason  that  the  creditor  who  held  it  and  was  known, 
should  be  omitted. 

Allegations  5, 6  and  7.  The  same  remarks  will  apply  to  the  omis- 
sion of  the  names  of  the  Bucks  County  Bank,  the  Medford  Bank, 
and  the  Camden  Bank,  in  regard  to  all  of  which,  Mr.  Aertson 
attempts  the  same  excuse. 

It  is  said  there  was  no  motive  for  any  fraudulent  statement  or 
omission  of  creditors.     (See  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  33.) 

The  motive  for  omission  of  the  names  of  his  creditors  is  very 
apparent,  and  the  falsity  of  the  excuse  attempted  for  it,  is  equally 
apparent. 

That  Bishop  Doane  should  have  forgotten  that  all  these  his  par- 
ticular friends  and  supporters,  were  his  creditors,  can  scarcely 
be  credited.  They  could  not  have  been  omitted  accidentally* 
Why,  then,  were  they  omitted  1  Simply,  we  apprehend,  ihat  he 
might  not  expose  these  his  active  friends,  who  controlled,  in  a 
great  measure,  the  votes  of  the  lay  delegates  of  their  respective 
churches,  to  the  charge  of  being  interested  more  for  themselves 
than  for  the  Church,  in  their  advocacy  of  Bishop  Doane,  and  that 


56 

the  weakness  of  Bishop  Doane  might  not  be  exposed  to  the  world; 
for  if  all  Bishop  Doane's  creditors  had  been  made  known,  it  would 
have  appeared  that  some  of  the  leading  and  active  laymen,  in  at 
least  eleven  or  twelve  of  the  churches  which  sustained  him,  were 
Bishop  Doane's  creditors;  so  that,  in  voting  to  sustain  Bishop 
Doane,  they  were  voting  to  secure  the  amounts  due  to  them;  and 
it  would  have  enabled  the  public  to  have  judged  what  credit  ought 
to  be  attached  to  the  reports  and  votes  of  committees  and  Con- 
ventions composed,  in  a  great  part,  of  Bishop  Doane's  creditors, 
employees  and  missionaries.  The  Bishop  in  New  Jersey  can  make 
and  unmake  missionaries  at  pleasure,  and  of  course  they  hold  their 
situations  at  his  will.  If  these  are  deducted  from  the  votes,  and 
those  absent  are  set  down  against  him,  which  we  believe  to  be 
almost  universally  the  case,  (for  wherever  a  man  is  for  him,  he  is 
sure  of  being  drummed  up,)  then  it  will  appear  that  a  majority  of 
both  clergy  and  laity  are  against  him.  Take,  for  example,  the 
vote  of  the  Adjourned  Convention  on  the  last  resolution,  for  send- 
ing a  copy  of  the  report  and  evidence  to  this  Court.  The  Journal 
of  the  Sixty-ninth  (Adjourned)  Annual  Convention  contains  the 
names  of  fifty-nine  clergy,  two  missionaries,  and  two  Deacons. 
It  requires  thirty-one  to  make  a  majority.  The  vote  of  the  clergy 
on  the  second  resolution  was  as  reported,  only  sixteen.  Deduct 
from  this  vote  four  employees  of  Bishop  Doane,  one  creditor  and 
five  missionaries,  leaves  only  six.  Nays,  three;  declined  to  vote, 
one.  Of  the  laity,  twenty  in  the  affirmative,  eight  in  the  negative. 
Deduct  the  vote  of  twelve  parishes  controlled  by  Bishop  Doane's 
creditors,  leaves  eight. 

Allegations  8,  9,  10,  15.  Bishop  Doane,  on  page  34-5  of  his 
Protest  and  Appeal,  undertakes  to  explain  the  omission  of  these 
creditors  on  his  list ;  and  he  says  these  debts  are  acknowledged 
in  his  schedule  of  real  estate,  which  forms  part  of  the  assign- 
ment. H  it  is  true  that  his  indebtedness  was  acknowledged  to 
these  creditors,  it  would  form  no  excuse  for  his  not  putting  the 
names  of  his  creditors  on  his  list,  when  he  thus  acknowledges  he 
knew  they  were  creditors.  But  it  is  not  true  that  his  indebted- 
ness to  these  creditors  is  acknowledged,  either  in  the  language 
made  use  of  in  the  inventory,  or  in  the  aggregate  amount  of  his 
debts,  as  summed  up  in  the  list  of  his  creditors.     (Seepage  23  of 


57 

Reply  of  Laymen.)  Let  us  see  what  the  language  of  the  inven- 
tory of  the  real  estate  is.  It  is  thus:  "  Xo.  2.  The  homestead 
property,  known  as  Riverside,  fronting  on  the  Delaware  river,  and 
bounded  on  the  east  by  Sr.  Mary's  Hall,  on  the  south  by  Pearl 
street,  and  on  the  west  by  Read  street,  subject  to  a  mortgage  to 
J.  Deacon  for  five  thousand  dollars;  also,  a  mortgage  to  L.  Car- 
ter for  ten  thousand  dollars,  on  which  about  four  thousand  dollars 
has  been  paid,  valued  at  one  dollar.  Where  is  the  acknowledge- 
ment of  George  W.  Doane's  indebtedness  in  the  above  extract? 
He  says  the  property  is  subject  to  mortgage  to  H.  R.  Cleve- 
land. He  don't  say  his,  G.  W.  Doane's  mortgage,  and  for 
aught  that  appears  in  this  statement,  the  property  may  have 
been  mortgaged  by  somebody  else,  and  may  have  been  pur- 
chased by  Bishop  Doane,  subject  to  the  incumbrance,  so  that  the 
debt  would  not  have  been  a  personal  debt  of  Bishop  Doane's,  but 
only  a  lien  upon  the  real  estate.  But  in  the  second  place,  we  say 
that  this  debt  of  H.  R.  Cleveland  is  not  in  the  amount  of  his  debts 
as  summed  up  on  the  list  of  his  creditors.  The  agcrre^ate  amount 
of  his  debts,  as  summed  up  on  that  list,  is  only  one  hundred  and 
fifty-five  thousand  five  hundred  and  ninety-three  dollars  and  sixty- 
seven  cents.  If  this  indebtedness  to  H.  R.  Cleveland,  which  he 
now  says  is  acknowledged  in  the  schedule  of  real  estate,  and 
other  indebtedness  to  other  persons  which  stand  in  the  same  posi- 
tion in  the  schedule  of  real  estate  as  that  of  H.  R.  Cleveland,  had 
been  included  in  the  amount  summed  up,  then  the  aggregate 
amount  of  his  indebtedness  would  have  appeared  to  have  been 
the  sum  of  two  hundred  and  sixtv-five  thousand  seven  hundred 
and  twenty-three  dollars.  Add  to  this  the  debts  shown  to  have 
been  omitted  under  specification  one,  viz  :  Episcopal  fund,  seven 
thousand  four  hundred  and  seventy-one  dollars  and  fifty-one  cents, 
due  Michael  Hays  and  others,  and  the  whole  amount  of  his  in- 
debtedness would  have  appeared  to  have  been  about  three  hun- 
dred and  fifteen  thousand  dollars,  instead  of  one  hundred  and  fifty- 
five  thousand  dollars.  There  was,  therefore,  doubtless,  a  reason 
for  leaving  them  out  of  the  list.  To  this  amount  is  to  be  added 
the  sum  of  two  hundred  dollars,  due  to  Dennis  McEvoy,  hod  car- 
rier, of  whom  he  had  borrowed  it,  and  did  not  put  in  his  list. 
Allegation  11.  This  debt  to  Zantzin^er  was  omitted,  and  the 


58 

explanation  of  it  attempted  to  be  given.  This  explanation,  sup- 
posing it  to  be  true,  does  not  cover  the  whole  of  the  account. 
And  he  has  since  been  adding  to  the  account,  and  being  ashamed 
to  purchase  liquor  in  his  own  name,  has  obtained  it  in  the  name 
of  Mrs.  Uoane. 

Allegation  12.  The  omission  of  this  name  was  attempted  to  be 
explained  by  saying  it  was  a  note  with  Deacon's  indorsement, 
and  that  it  was  put  down  to  Deacon.  This  is  all  a  pretence. 
Why  should  it  be  put  down  to  Deacon  ?  He  had  not  paid  it  at 
the  time  of  the  assignment.  Mr.  Page  was  the  creditor,  not  Dea- 
con. But  why  should  it  rather  be  put  down  to  Deacon  as  indor- 
ser  than  to  R.  T.  Germain,  who  was  the  indorser  prior  to  Deacon? 

Allegation  13.  It  is  proved  by  the  letter  of  Herman  Hooker 
that  he  was  a  creditor,  and  his  name  was  omitted  in  the  list  of 
creditors.  Why?  no  explanation  is  given  by  Bishop  Doane.  It 
is  further  proved  that  he  received  the  money  to  pay  for  the  books, 
and  that  he  bought  them  on  credit,  and  did  not  pay  for  them. 
(See  Hooker's  letter,  page  144  Mr.  Milnor's  testimony.  Report  of 
Committee.) 

This  was  a  transaction  so  flagrant,  it  was  such  a  breach  of 
a  sacred  trust,  that  he  could  not  have  forgotten  it,  unless  his  heart 
had  become  so  hard,  and  the  commission  of  crime  so  frequent, 
that  it  made  no  impression  on  his  memory. 

Allegation  14.  It  is  said  by  Aertson,  page  109,  that  Bishop 
Doane  did  not  know  that  Humphrey  was  a  creditor,  and  that 
they  were  put  down  to  Deacon  or  Hays.  What  right  had  he  to  put 
them  down  to  Deacon  or  Hays  any  more  than  to  Germain,  who 
was  also  an  indorser  on  them,  as  none  of  the  indorsers  had  paid 
them  ?  Why  did  he  not  ascertain  from  Hays  and  Deacon  wheth- 
er they  had  paid  them  before  he  swore  they  were  creditors  for  these 
notes?  He  must  have  known  that  there  were  many  checks  out- 
standing which  were  unpaid  ;  an  examination  of  his  check  book 
and  of  his  Bank  book  would  have  shown  him  this,  and  it  was  his 
duty  to  have  examined  them  before  he  undertook  to  swear  to  the 
list  of  creditors.  Deacon  has  checks  unpaid  amounting  to  two 
hundred  and  seventeen  dollars,  and  Hays  to  two  hundred  and 
eighty-five  dollars.  These  were  dated  some  times  three  or  four 
months  ahead. 


59 

Allegation  17.  He  puts  down  Hays  only  as  a  creditor  to  the 
amount  of  seventeen  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  when  he  must 
have  known  that  he  was  a  creditor  to  a  much  larger  amount. 

Allegation  18.  So  in  regard  to  Deacon,  who  he  puts  down  as 
a  creditor  for  twenty-three  thousand  four  hundred  and  fifty  dol- 
lars, when  he  must  have  known  he  was  a  creditor  for  a  much 
larger  amount. 

If  further  evidence  is  required  to  prove  that  Bishop  Doane  has 

not  the  slightest  regard   for  truth,  and   habitually  violates  it,  the 

following  instance  of  his  falsehood  may  suffice.     We  have  learned 

from  a  source  entitled   to  the  highest  credit,  that  Bishop  Doane, 

in  the  address  which  he  made  to  the  Court  of  Bishops,  asserted 

that  Richard  S.  Coxe,  Esquire,  had  stated,  "  That  he  would  not 

be  associated  with  Mr.  Hoisted  in  the  case."     This  assertion  was 

doubtless  made  with   the  view  of  injuring  the  character  of  Mr 

Halsted,  and  of  lessening  the  weight  of  the   charge   sent   by  the 

four  laymen  to  three  Bishops.     Upon  hearing  of  this  slander,  Mr. 

Halsted  wrote  to   Richard  S.  Coxe,  Esquire,  to  enquire  of  him  if 

he  ever  made  use  of  such  an  expression,  or  gave  Bishop  Doane 

any  reason  for  such  an  assertion;  and  the  following  is  the  reply 

of  Mr.  Coxe : 

Washington,  Sept.  21,  1823. 
William  Halsted,  Esq. — 

Dear  Sir:  Could  I  be  surprised  at  any  thing  emanating  from 
Bishop  Doane,  I  should  have  experienced  such  a  feeling  at  hear- 
ing that  he  made  such  an  assertion  as  you  mention.  So  far  from 
ever  using  the  language  attributed  to  me,  I  have  throughout  urged 
the  absolute  necessity  for  having  you  as  one  of  the  Counsel  for 
the  prosecution,  without  whose  aid  I  was  unwilling  to  act.  The 
use  of  my  name  was  whollv  unwarranted. 

RICHARD  S.  COXE. 

Further  to  show  that  Mr.  Coxe  has  alwavs  entertained  the 
same  opinion,  we  publish  an  extract  from  his  letter  to  Mr.  Hal- 
sted, dated  May  31,  1852,  which  is  as  follows: 

Wm.  Halsted,  Esq. — 

Dear  Sir  :  I  should  have  written  you  some  days  since,  but  hear- 
ing that  the  trial  had  been  postponed  until  October,  wished  first 
to  learn  the  truth  of  the  report.  It  is,  I  percieve,  confirmed  in 
the  Episcopal  Recorder.  In  the  mean  time  I  have  received  a  let- 
ter from  Bishop  Meade,  informing  me  that  he  had  asked  your 


60 

professional  aid  in  this  matter.  It  was  with  great  gratification 
that  I  received  this  information,  for  appreciating  the  value  of  the 
aid  you  could  render,  and  indeed  the  necessity  of  having  it,  I  had 
determined  to  write  you  asking  your  assistance  and  advice. 

These  letters  are  sufficient  to  prove  the  falsity  of  Bishop 
Doane's  assertions.  But  it  was  a  part  of  the  system  of  Bishop 
Doane  to  vilify  and  abuse  the  laymen.  He  commenced  it  as  soon 
as  the  charges  were  sent  by  them  to  the  three  Bishops,  and  he  has 
kept  it  up  ever  since.  At  the  sitting  of  the  former  Court  of  Bish- 
ops, as  we  have  been  credibly  informed,  he  called  them  "  vaga- 
bond." And  in  his  pamphlet  he  attributed  their  action  to  mali- 
cious motives.  He  called  Mr.  Halsted  in  Convention  at  Newark, 
"  a  chartered  libertine"  He  was  compelled  to  retract  this  charge, 
but  he  never  made  the  amende  honorable  which  is  due  from  a 
gentleman,  much  less  a  Christian  ;  and  the  papers  friendly  to  him 
which  gave  currency  to  the  slander  were  very  slow  to  publish 
the  retraction. 

Specification  XXIX. 

That  he  acquiesced  in  the  sale  of  his  valuable  Library,  and 
other  of  his  effects,  at  a  price  much  below  its  value. 

The  value  of  several  of  the  articles  sold  has  been  considered 
under  specification  eighteen.  This  Library  is  valued  by  himself 
and  assignees  at  seven  thousand  dollars.  It  was  worth  at  least 
ten  thousand  dollars.  But  it  was  sold  at  much  less  than  it  was 
valued  at.  The  whole  of  the  personal  property  was  valued  at 
thirteen  thousand  seven  hundred  and  fifty-two  dollars,  not  one-half 
of  its  real  value,  but  was  sold  at  two  thousand  four  hundred  and 
fifty-eight  dollars  and  four  cents  less  than  the  valuation,  as  ap- 
peal's thus  : 

The  amount  of  the  appraisement  of  personal  property  as  shown 
under  specification  eighteen,  was  $13,752.00 

The  amount  of  sales,  as  charged  in  the  account  of 

assignees,  is  11,293.96 


(See  Appendix,  letter  CC.)  $2,458.04 

Showing  the   amount  of  sales   to  be  two  thousand  four  hun- 
dred and  fifty-eight  dollars  and  four  cents  less  than  the  valuation. 
It  would  swell  this  vindication  to  too  great  length  to  go  into 


61 

the  evidence  to  prove  the  gross  inadequacy  of  price  at  which  all 
the  articles  were  sold  at  the  assignees  sale.  The  proof  in  regard 
to  a  few  will  suffice. 

1.  In  regard  to  the  sale  of  the  silver  plate.  It  was  valued  in  the 
inventory  at  three  hundred  dollars;  it  is  charged  to  have  been 
worth  much  more.  But  what  did  it  sell  for  ?  We  have  the  evidence 
of  the  assignees  of  Bishop  Doane,  who  made  the  sale.  In  their 
answer  to  the  bill  in  Chancery,  filed  by  Michael  Hays  and  others, 
against  the  assignees,  Bishop  Doane  and  others,  the  assignees  say  : 
"  And  these  defendants  further  say,  that  they  admit  that  at  the  said 
sale  the  silver  plate,  which  in  the  appraisement  had  been  estimated 
at  three  hundred  dollars,  the  said  Robert  B.  Aertson  being  one  of 
the  appraisers,  was  sold  to  the  said  Edward  N.  Perkins,  who  is 
step-son  to  George  W.  Doane,  for  seventy-nine  dollars,  which 
they  admit  was  a  small  price." 

The  said  assignees  in  their  answer  further  say,  in  regard  to  the 
Library:  "They  admit  that  the  said  Library  of  the  said  George 
W.  Doane  did  contain  many  rare  and  valuable  books,  and  that  it 
was  appraised  at  the  sum  of  seven  thousand  dollars.  And  they 
admit  that  Miss  Caroline  Watson  purchased  it,  and  that  she 
shortlv  afterwards  transferred  it  to  Sarah  P.  Cleveland."  And 
that  it  was  sold  for  three  thousand  dollars  they  do  not  deny.  And 
Bishop  Doane,  in  his  answer  in  Chancery,  says,  that  "  being  an 
inmate  of  the  same  house  with  Sarah  P.  Cleveland,  he  is  permit- 
ted to  use  the  same." 

In  his  examination  before  James  Wilson,  Esquire,  Commis- 
sioner to  take  bail  and  affidavits  in  the  Supreme  Court,  the  follow- 
ing answers  were  given  to  the  questions  propounded  to  him  : 

Question — Have  you  possession  of  it  (the  Library,)  now  1 

Answer — I  have  not  possession  of  it  in  the  sense  in  which  I 
suppose  "possession"  to  be  properly  used.  I  am  not  the  owner 
of  it.  The  Library  remains  in  the  house  which  I  occupy,  and  I 
have  the  use  of  it. 

Question — Does  it  remain  in  the  same  room  it  did  before  the 
sale  was  made  ? 

Answer — Yes.  I  use  it  in  the  same  way  I  did  before  the  as- 
signment was  made,  except  I  cannot  alienate  it. 


62 


Specification  XXX. 

This  charge  is  drawn  from  that  most  extraordinary  document, 
put  out  by  Bishop  Doane,  entitled  his  Protest  and  Appeal.  We 
consider  it  extraordinary  for  its  folly,  for  its  mendacity,  for  its 
calumny,  and  for  its  blasphemy. 

That  portion  of  it  which  we  have  now  to  deal  with,  is  its  men- 
dacity. The  other  characteristic  qualities  of  this  document  are 
so  apparent  on  its  face,  that  an  intelligent  public  could  not  fail  to 
discern  them,  and  has,  we  believe,  already  put  upon  them  the  seal 
of  its  decided  condemnation.  But  the  bold  assertion,  the  ingenious 
subtlety  and  artful  misrepresentation,  by  which  falsehood  is  cov- 
ered up  or  truth  suppressed,  can  only  be  made  manifest  by  a  pa- 
tient investigation  of  facts  which  a  general  reader  would  scarce 
have  the  time,  even  if  he  felt  the  desire,  to  make. 

The  general  nature  of  the  charge  is  a  violation  of  truth.  One 
of  the  gravest  charges  which  can  be  brought  against  a  minister 
of  the  Most  High  God,  who  emphatically  styles  himself  a  God 
of  truth. 

Bishop  Home  says,  "  All  hypocrisy  is  detestable.  But  none 
is  so  detestable  as  that  which  is  coolly  written  with  full  premedi- 
tation by  a  man  of  talents,  assuming  the  character  of  a  moral 
and  religious  instructor,  a  minister,  a  prophet  of  the  truth  of  the 
infinite  God.  Truth  is  a  virtue  perfectly  defined,  mathematically 
clear,  and  completely  understood  by  all  men  of  common  sense. 
There  can  be  no  halting  between  uttering  truth  and  falsehood,  no 
doubts,  no  mistakes,  as  between  piety  and  enthusiasm,  frugality 
and  parsimony,  generosity  and  profusion.  Transgression,  there- 
fore, is  always  a  known,  definitive,  deliberate  villainy.  In  the 
sudden  moment  of  strong  temptation,  in  the  hour  of  unguarded 
attack,  in  the  flutter  and  trepidation  of  unexpected  alarm,  the  best 
men  may  perhaps  be  surprised  into  any  sin;  but  he  who  can 
coolly,  of  steady  design,  and  with  no  unusual  impulse,  utter  false- 
hood and  vent  hypocrisy,  is  not  far  from  finished  depravity." 

Solomon  says,  "  A  righteous  man  hateth  lying,  but  a  wicked 
man  is  loathsome  and  cotneth  to  shame."     Prov.  xiii.,  5. 

One  of  the  Rev.  fathers  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  the  Bishop 
of  Pennsylvania,  speaking  of  Abbott's  Life  of  Napoleon,  in  Har- 


63 

per's  Magazine,  is  reported  to  have  said  :  "  A  series  of  articles 
are  now  being  published  in  one  of  the  popular  periodicals  of  the 
day,  said  to  be  written  by  a  clergyman.  I  hope  for  the  honor 
of  the  profession  this  is  not  so.  These  articles  throw  the  halo 
of  glory  round  the  character  of  a  selfish,  ambitious,  and  bloody 
man.  They  make  him  out  kind,  benevolent,  and  almost  every 
thing  that  is  good ;  making  his  crimes  virtues,  because  developed 
upon  such  an  enormous  scale.  Now  if  a  man  lies,  it  is  our  duty, 
if  we  speak  historically,  to  say  he  lies.  Away  with  literature 
that  would  make  a  paragon  of  excellenee  out  of  a  monster." 

Does  this  principle,  thus  laid  down  by  such  high  authority,  ap- 
ply merely  to  the  poor  clergyman ;  or  does  it  apply  equally  to  the 
mitred  Bishop?  When  Bishops  speak  historically  of  a  man  who 
lies,  is  it  their  duty  to  say  so?  If  it  is,  is  it  less  the  duty  of  Bish- 
ops when  they  speak  judicially  ?  Or  is  it  their  duty  to  make  the 
crimes  of  a  Bishop  virtues,  because  developed  upon  an  enormous 
scale  ? 

Bishop  Doane  declares  his  entire  and  perfect  integrity  and  inno- 
cence of  all  the  charges.  This  is  proved  false  by  his  own  confes- 
sion. In  that  he  admits  that  he  made  use  of  trust  funds  in  a  way 
which  he  deeply  regrets.  He  admits,  "  That  in  the  course  of  all 
these  transactions  human  infirmity  may  have  led  him  into  many  er- 
rors, he  deeply  feels,  he  does  not  wish  to  justify  or  excuse  them. 
For  these  things,  in  all  humility  and  sorrow  before  God  and  man,  he 
has  always  felt  himself  liable  to,  and  willing  to  receive  the  friendly 
reproof  of  his  brethren  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  especially  of  the 
Bishops  of  this  Church." 

If  he  is  innocent  of  all  the  charges  in  regard  to  which  the  four 
laymen  thought  an  investigation  necessary,  why  did  he  always 
feel  himself  liable  to,  and  willing  to  receive  the  friendly  reproof 
of  his  brethren  in  Christ?  Compare  this  with  his  Protest  and 
Appeal,  page  17,  lines  5,  G,  7. 

The  falsehood  of  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  in  which  he  denies 
"that  he  induced  individuals  to  indorse  notes  for  him  under  pre- 
tence that  they  were  to  renew  notes  which  had  been  previously 
indorsed  by  said  individuals,  and  after  obtaining  said  notes  or 
that  avowed  object,  appropriating  them  to  other  purposes,  (see 
Protest  and  Appeal,  pages  39,  40,)  is  fully  proved  by  the  aflida- 


64 

vi'ts  of  Michael  Hays  and  Joseph  Deacon.  (See  Appendix  R 
und  DD,  and  his  letter  to  Hays  and  Doane.) 

Again,  the  falsehood  of  his  statement  in  his  Protest  and  Appeal, 
page  26,  "  That  he  had  been  the  bearer  of  a  letter  from  the  for- 
mer Treasurer  of  the  Society  for  the  promotion  of  Christian 
knowledge  and  piety,  to  the  Rev.  Mr.  Stubbs.  then  newly  ap- 
pointed to  that  office,  as  afterwards  it  appeared  it  contained  Bank 
notes  for  one  thousand  dollars,"  is  fully  proved  by  the  letter  of  the 
Hev.  James  Chapman,  the  former  Treasurer  of  said  Society  ;  who 
says:  "The  Bishop,  in  his  answer  to  the  first  of  the  charges 
brought  against  him  by  the  four  laymen,  states  that  he  was  the 
bearer  of  a  letter  from  me  to  Mr.  Stubbs,  containing  one  thousand 
dollars.  In  this  matter  the  Bishop  is  in  error ;  the  money,  amount^ 
ing  to  one  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  which  I  had,  as  late 
Treasurer  of  the  Episcopal  Society,  to  pay  over  to  Mr.  Stubbs,  had 
been  deposited  in  the  Commercial  Bank  of  New  Jersey,  as  long 
as  two  weeks  before  Bishop  Doane  and  Mr.  Stubbs  were  in  Perth 
Ambov,  on  the  10th  of  October,  1848,  and  there  remained  until 
about  two  o'clock  on  that  dav.  I  agreed  with  Mr.  Stubbs  that  I 
should  draw  the  one  thousand  five  hundred  dollars  out  of  the 
Bank  while  he  left  me  to  take  his  dinner,  and  that  he  should  call 
for  it  at  mv  house  immediately  after  dinner.  This  arrangement 
was  carried  into  effect,  Mr.  Stubbs  received  one  thousand  five 
hundred  dollars,  for  which  I  have  his  receipt,  and  he  left  me 
immediately." 

It  is  unnecessary  to  swell  this  vindication  by  producing  evi- 
dence to  show  the  numerous  falsehoods  and  misrepresentations  of 
this  famous  document.  We  could  show  at  least  as  manv  false- 
hoods  and  misrepresentations  in  it  as  there  are  pages.  But  ta- 
king his  own  maxim  of  "falsus  in  una  falsus  in  omnibus"  we 
have  already  shown  sufficient,  particularly  against  a  man  who 
boasts  that  his  publication  "  shall  be  so  constructed  as  to  defy  con- 
tradiction or  material  correction,"  and  who  presents  it  to  the  pub- 
lic "  as  a  stand  point  for  honest  people."  We  are  inclined  to 
think  that  it  is  much  better  entitled  to  the  appellation  of  the 
"finger-post  for  rogues." 

We  think  we  have  shown  Bishop  Doane  to  be  an  unworthy 
minister  of  "  a  just  and  holy  Cod,  who  is  emphatically  called  a 


65 

God  of  truth."  Jeremiah  x.,  10.  "  The  Lord  abundant  in  truth.*' 
Exod.  xviii.,  21.  And  of  whom  it  is  said  bvthe  Psalmist,  "  Thou 
desircth  truth  in  the  inward  parts." 

What  Godliness,  or  as  Bishop  Uoane  says,  Godlikeness,  is  there 
to  the  God  of  truth  in  a  man  who  habitually  violates  the  truth? 

We  think  we  have  shown,  also,  that  he  does  not  belong  to  that 
class  of  the  ministers  of  God,  who,  like  St.  Paul,  "  have  renounced 
the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty,  not  walking  in  craftiness  nor 
handling  the  word  of  God  deceitfully,  but  by  manifestations  of 
the  truth,  commending  themselves  to  everv  man's  conscience  in 
the  sight  of  God."  But  that  he  belongs  to  that  class  of  whom  it 
has  been  said  : 

"The  enemies  of  God  rejoiced,  and  loud 
The  unbeliever  laughed,  boasting  a  life 
Of  fairer  character  than  his  who  owned 
For  king  and  guide  the  Undented  One." 

If  any  thing  further  was  necessary  to  vindicate  the  course  of 
the  four  laymen,  and  to  show  that  they  had  good  cause  for  asking 
an  investigation  into  the  conduct  of  Bishop  Doane,  they  might 
find  it  in  the  declaration  of  those  three  pure  and  honorable  pre- 
senting Bishops,  made  in  their  reply  to  the  argument  presented 
bv  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of  New  Jersev :  "  We  now 
stand  here  full  handed  with  proof  of  the  allegations  of  the  pre- 
sentment, and  earnestly  pray  you,  by  your  regard  for  your  sacred 
vow,  faithfully  to  administer  the  discipline  of  the  Church." 

We  now  leave  to  a  discriminating  public  to  decide  the  question, 
whether  the  four  laymen  were,  or  were  not,  justified  in  request- 
ing the  three  Bishops  to  make  an  investigation  into  the  charges 
above  specified  ? 

The  American  people  are  a  thinking  people,  they  are  a  Bible 
reading  people,  and  a  practical  people.  They  are  not  only  com- 
petent to  apply,  but  they  are  in  the  habit  of  applying  the  plain 
and  simple  rules  of  Bible  morality  to  the  conduct  of  every  man 
who  calls  himself  a  Christian,  and  more  particularly  to  a  minis- 
ter of  the  gospel  and  a  Bishop.  They  will  not  give  a  minister 
or  a  Bishop  credit  for  piety  because  he  has  a  cross  upon  his  house 
or  dangling  at  his  breast,  or  a  cocked  hat  on  his  head,  or  a  dia- 
mond ring  on  his  finger;  on  the  contrary,  they  will  be  very  apt 

E 


66 

to  judge  that  piety  which  is  dressed  up  with  so  much  parade,  can- 
only  be  skin  deep.  And  that  a  man  who  can,  "in  the  presence 
of  Almighty  God,  and  in  the  name  of  the  holy,  undivided  trinity," 
make  such  an  appeal  as  that  contained  in  Bishop  Doane's  pam- 
phlet, and  then  "  summon  his  accusers  in  solemnity  and  sorrow 
before  the  bar  of  God,"  is  one  of  the  last  persons  that  can  be  ex- 
pected to  be  ready  to  appear  and  answer  for  his  conduct  before- 
any  impartial  tribunal,  much  less  that  dread  tribunal  to  which  he 
summoned  his  brother  Bishops. 

But  before  we  close  what  we  have  to  say  in  vindication  of  our- 
selves, we  feel  compelled  to  notice  the  very  extraordinary  course 
adopted  by  the  Court  of  Bishops  at  Camden,  in  regard  to  the 
charges  presented  against  Bishop  Doane.  "We  feel  that  we  have 
been  personally  aggrieved  by  the  course  adopted,  or  at  least  per- 
mitted by  the  Court,  and  that  it  is  due  to  ourselves  as  individuals 
and  as  Episcopalians,  as  well  as  to  the  Church  o(  which  we  are 
humble  members,  to  express  freely  and  fearlessly  the  indignation 
we  feel  against  the  proceedings  of  the  Court  of  Bishops.  We 
say,  then,  that  the  decision  of  the  Court  in  this  case,  as  well  as 
the  whole  course  ot  proceeding,  shocks  all  our  ideas  of  propri- 
ety, of  justice,  of  common  sense,  of  common  law,  of  canon  law,. 
and  of  Divine  law. 

The  first  violation  of  propriety  by  the  Court,  of  which  we  com- 
plain, was  that  of  allowing  a  defendant,  arraigned  before  them 
on  charges  of  crime  and  immorality,  to  move  the  Court  to  turn 
out  of  an  adjoining  room,  which  had  been  rented  for  their  ac- 
commodation, the  counsel  of  the  presenters,  upon  an  allegation, 
unsustained  by  any  evidence  whatever,  that  they  could  hear  what 
was  said  in  Court.  And  this  court  was  so  complaisant  to  the  ac- 
cused, that  they  did  actually  order  the  counsel  of  the  presenters 
out  of  a  room  over  which  the  Court  had  no  more  control  than 
over  the  house  in  which  the  counsel  reside.  The  impropriety  of 
such  an  order  was  so  glaring,  that  a  newspaper  which  noticed  it, 
undertook  to  palliate  the  outrage  by  saving  thut  Bishop  Doane, 
or  his  friends,  immediately  offered  the  presenters  and  their  coun- 
sel the  use  of  their  room  which  they  had  procured  in  an  adjoining 
building;  although,  in  truth,  no  such  offer  was  ever  made  by 
Bishop  Doane,  or  any  of  his  friends,  to  the  presenting  Bishops  or 
their  counsel. 


67 

The  next  decision  of  the  Court,  involved  in  it  not  only  a  viola- 
tion of  propriety,  but  also  of  common  sense  and  common  justice, 
(to  say  nothing  at  present  of  the  law  and  canons  of  the  Church.) 
This  decision  admitted  the  report  of  the  Committee  of  the  Con- 
vention, and  the  evidence  taken  by  the  Committee  of  the  Dioce- 
san Convention  to  be  laid  before  the  Court.  That  this  was  man- 
ifestly improper  the  Court  appear  to  acknowledge  by  the  decision 
which  they  subsequently  made,  "that  no  order  or  decree  of  the 
Court  in  October,  1852,  or  of  this  Court,  shall  be  taken  to  admit 
the  right  of  any  Diocese  to  come  between  a  Court  of  Bishops 
and  the  respondent  Bishop,  after  canonical  presentment  first  made 
by  three  Bishops." 

Notwithstanding  this  decision,  the  Court  admitted  not  only  the 
report  of  the  Committee  of  the  Diocese,  but  the  ex  parte  evidence 
taken  bv  such  a  Committee  in  the  absence  of  and  without  notice 
to  the  presenters.  But  what  is  worse,  they  admitted  the  accused 
lo  argue  upon  the  statements  made  therein,  as  if  the  statements 
were  true,  without  giving  to  the  presenters  any  opportunity  to 
controvert  the  facts.  And  what  is  still  worse,  thev  assume  the 
ex  parte  statements  made  in  these  reports,  and  without  allowing 
any  evidence  to  contradict  them,  they  proceed  to  make  them  the 
foundation  for  the  most  unwarrantable  and  illegal  decision  that 
has  ever  been  promulgated  by  any  Ecclesiastical  tribunal  in  Amer- 
ica. They  say,  "  that  the  Convention,  through  its  most  honorable 
and  influential  laymen,  had  satisfied  itself  that  there  is  no  inten- 
tion of  crime  or  immorality  on  his  part."  What  authority  had  the 
Court  of  Bishops  for  making  this  assertion?  They  had  no  evi- 
dence whatever  on  the  subject  ;  they  had  nothing  but  the  asser- 
tion of  Bishop  Doane,  or  his  Committee.  But  let  the  assertion 
come  from  whom  it  may,  it  is  false,  and  the  person  or  persons 
who  palmed  it  off  on  the  Court  of  Bishops  knew  it  to  be  false. 

The  Committee,  who  are  called  the  "most  honorable  and  influ- 
ential," were  James  Potter,  J.  H.  Wakefield,  C.  M.  Harker,  D.  B. 
Ryall,  T.  H.  Whitney,  Henry  McFarlan,  and  J.  L.  McKnight. 
Now  we  have  no  disposition  to  disparage  these  gentlemen,  we 
are  willing  they  should  pass  for  all  they  are  worth,  and  a  great 
deal  more.  But  when,  for  sinister  purposes,  and  with  a  view  of 
giving  their  report  an  undue  influence,  they  arc  represented  as 


68 

the  "  most  honorable  and  most  influential  laymen,"  it  is  due  to  the 
other  laymen  of  the  Convention  to  deny  it ;  and  we  do  deny  it. 
No  Jerseyman  would  pretend  that  they  are  more  honorable  than 
James  Parker,  Cortlandt  Parker,  Archer  GifTord,  F.  B.  Chetwood, 
Charles  Olden,  Walter  Rutherford,  and  a  dozen  other  members 
of  the  Convention,  and  yet  to  such  pitiful  falsehoods  and  misrep- 
resentations were  Bishop  Doane  and  his  Committee  driven,  to 
bolster  up  the  partial,  illegal,  and  ex  parte  decision  of  the  Dioce- 
san Convention  ;  a  decision  which  his  own  reluctant  confession 
effectually  repudiates. 

But  the  admission  of  these  ex  parte  statements,  crediting 
them,  and  making  them  the  foundation  of  their  decision,  is  not 
the  only  impropriety  into  which  the  Court  of  Bishops  fell.  They 
fell  into  another,  which  was  aggravated  by  the  grossest  injustice 
to  the  four  laymen.  After  receiving  these  reports,  they  allowed 
Bishop  Doane  to  make  use  of  the  statements  contained  in  them 
as  the  foundation  of  a  gross  attack  upon  the  character  of  the  four 
laymen.  The  four  laymen  are  allowed  to  be  the  party  and  the 
accusers,  so  far  as  to  subject  them  to  all  the  abuse  and  slander 
which  Bishop  Doane  could  heap  upon  them,  but  they  are  not  al- 
lowed to  be  a  party  or  an  accuser,  so  far  as  to  disprove  his  false- 
hoods, or  to  reply  to  his  calumnies.  We  do  not  know  all  the 
falsehoods  and  slanders  which  Bishop  Doane  perpetrated  against 
us  before  that  high  Court,  and  therefore  we  cannot  reply  to  them. 
With  the  exception  of  one  single  allegation  we  have  not  been 
able  to  learn  the  distinct  statements  on  which  his  vituperation 
against  us  was  based.  But  we  have  learned  from  a  source  enti- 
tled to  the  highest  credit,  that  Bishop  Doane,  in  his  address  to  the 
Court,  did  assert,  that  Richard  S.  Coxe,  Esq.  had  stated  that  he 
would  not  be  associated  with  William  Halsted  in  this  case.  The 
falsity  of  this  allegation  is  proved  by  the  letters  of  Mr.  Coxe, 
which  are  stated  under  our  remarks  upon  the  twenty-eighth  spe- 
cification. 

The  gross  injustice  done  by  the  Court  to  the  four  laymen,  by 
allowing  Bishop  Doane  to  go  out  of  the  record  to  villify  and 
abuse  them  in  their  absence,  must  be  apparent  to  every  honorable 
man.  But  the  injustice  to  the  laymen  is  nothing  when  compared 
to  the  injury  that  this  decision  is  calculated  to  do  the  Church,  by 


69 

exciting  in  the  minds  of  laymen  the  opinion  that  they  are  deemed 
by  the  Bishops  as  of  no  kind  of  consequence  in  the  Church,  ex- 
cept to  raise  money  to  support  the  clergy. 

The  decision  of  the  Court  of  Bishops  we  allege  to  be  repug- 
nant to  common  sense. 

Those  who  undertake  to  justify  it,  place  it  upon  the  ground 
that  the  Bishops  possess  a  "discretion  irrespectively  of  any  canon 
under  which  they  sit  as  judges."  This  is  the  view  of  the  editor 
of  the  "  Register."  And  others  base  it  upon  the  ground  of  "  an 
inherent  power  of  the  Bishops."  This  is  the  view  of  "  The 
Church  Journal."  Now  was  there  ever  such  arrant  nonsense  put 
forth  by  men  pretending  to  common  sense,  as  that  which  gives  to 
judges  a  power  to  set  up  their  own  discretion  to  over-ride,  abro- 
gate and  nullify  the  very  law  under  which  they  hold  their  judi- 
cial functions.  It  would  appear  to  be  a  sufficient  answrer  to  such 
a  monstrous  absurdity,  to  ask,  what  authority  had  these  Bishops 
to  assemble  together  as  a  Court  ?  What  authority  to  receive  anv 
presentment  ?  What  authority  to  notify  Bishop  Doane  to  appear? 
What  authority  to  do  any  act  whatever  as  a  Court,  except  what 
thev  derived  from  the  canons  of  the  General  Convention  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States?  If  these  can- 
ons are  of  sufficient  validity  to  constitute  a  court  for  the  trial  of 
a  Bishop,  common  sense  would  hold  them  sufficient  authority  to 
direct  the  mode  of  trial.  But  no,  the  Court  of  Bishops  don't  hold 
any  such  common  sense  doctrine.  They  have,  according  to  their 
notion,  an  arbitrary  discretion,  by  which  they  can  take  just  such 
parts  of  the  canon  as  suits  them,  and  reject  what  don't  suit  them. 
The  old  maxims  which  have  been  handed  down  to  us  by  all  the 
sages  of  the  law,  viz :  "  That  arbitrary  discretion  is  the  law  of 

• 

tyrants,"  they  appear  to  suppose  was  never  intended  to  apply  to 
such  a  distinguished  body  of  Reverend  Judges  as  compose  an 
Ecclesiastical  Court.  Well,  unfortunately  for  us  poor  laymen, 
with  all  our  respect  for  the  clergy,  we  have  never  supposed  them 
so  distinguished  for  common  sense  that  they  were  fit  to  be  husted 
with  an  arbitrary  discretion  to  violate  all  laws  and  all  constitutions ; 
and  therefore  we  really  supposed  that  the  canons  of  the  Church 
were  made  for  the  very  purpose  of  cutting  up  by  the  roots  and 
effectually  destroying  this  kind  of  discretion,  and  for  the  purpose 


70 

of  keeping  the  judges  within  certain  well  defined  limits  which  all 
could  understand.  This  occurred  to  us  as  the  common  sense 
view  of  the  matter. 

In  this  view  we  are  happy  to  find  ourselves  sustained  by  one 
of  the  latest  and  ablest  writers  on  Church  polity,  the  Rev.  Calvin 
Colton,  L.  L.  D.  In  his  Genius  and  Mission  of  the  American 
Episcopal  Church,  page  180,  he  says:  "  In  the  organization  of 
the  American  Episcopal  Church,  her  polity  brings  the  Bishops 
under  law  as  much  as  a  Presbyter,  Deacon  or  Layman.  The 
authority  of  that  Church  is  purely  and  exclusively  canonical.  It 
is  in  no  case  and  in  no  degree  personal  or  arbitrary.  This  is  a 
most  important  and  practical  distinction."  {See  also  pages  182y 
183.) 

But  this  decision  is  upheld  also  upon  the  ground  of  an  inherent 
power  in  the  Bishops.  Now  we  confess  we  do  not  understand 
either  the  nature  or  extent  of  this  inherent  power.  But  to  show 
the  absurdity  of  such  a  pretence,  let  us  carry  out  this  doctrine  of 
inherent  power  to  its  consequences,  and  see  where  it  leads  us.  If 
the  Bishops  had  an  inherent  power  to  dismiss  a  presentment,  not- 
withstanding the  canon  declared  it  should  be  tried,  they  would 
have  an  equally  inherent  power  to  try  a  Bishop,  whether  the  can- 
on authorized  it  or  not.  And  they  must  have  an  inherent  power 
also  to  say  how  he  should  be  tried,  notwithstanding  the  canon  di- 
rected a  particular  mode  of  trial.  The  inherent  power  which 
can  dispense  with  one  part  o{  a  canon  can  dispense  with  another. 
Under  pretext  of  this  illimitable  inherent  power,  wThat  is  there  to 
prevent  the  Court  of  Bishops  putting  a  brother  Bishop  on  tria? 
without  notice,  and  without  allowing  him  any  evidence,  and  con- 
demning him  in  his  absence  ?  Certainly  there  is  nothing  to  pre- 
vent it,  and  it  is  no  great  stretch  of  imagination  to  see  that  this 
is  pretty  much  what  they  have  already  done  with  the  four  lay- 
men. They  have  put  them  on  trial  without  notice ;  they  have 
tried  them  upon  the  ex  parte  allegation  of  Bishop  Doane,  made 
in  their  absence,  without  the  sanction  of  an  oath  ;  they  have  given 
them  no  opportunity  of  answering  the  charges  which  they  allowed 
one  of  their  body  to  make  against  them,  and  they  have  virtually 
condemned  them  unheard.  And  if  a  brother  Bishop  should  happen 
to  be  obnoxious  to  a  majority  of  the  Court,  we  see  nothing  which 


71 

would  prevent  them  making  use  of  this  inherent  power  to  sacri- 
fice him;  as  it  would  appear  they  were  willing  to  sacrifice  the 
characters  of  the  four  laymen  because  they  had  the  audacity  to 
speak  the  truth  in  regard  to  one  of  their  brethren. 

But  we  have  also  said  that  this  decision  is  illegal ;  the  very 
ground  upon  which  it  is  placed,  of  "inherent  power  "  assumes  that 
it  is  above  and  beyond  all  law.  Now  it  is  an  absurdity  to  call  a  Court 
that  acknowledges  no  law,  and  acts  by  virtue  of  inherent  power, 
a  judicial  tribunal  The  only  power  of  a  judicial  tribunal  is  to 
declare  what  the  law  is.  But  an  inherent  power  to  disregard  all 
law  must  be  a  tyrannical  power;  it  has  no  kind  of  analogy  to  ju- 
dicial power.  And  if  we  examine  the  action  of  the  Bishops  as- 
sembled at  Camden  for  the  trial  of  Bishon  Doane,  we  shall  see 
that  if  they  ever  put  on  the  robes  of  judicial  office,  they  com- 
pletely divested  themselves  of  them  before  they  dismissed  the 
case.  Who  ever  before  heard  of  the  Judges  of  a  Court  appoint- 
ing a  committee  of  their  body  to  enter  into  a  negotiation  with  the 
accused  person  to  ascertain  how  much  they  could  get  him  to  con- 
fess of  the  charges  exhibited  against  him,  on  condition  that  if  he 
would  confess  his  guilt  he  should  escape  trial  and  punishment  ? 
chaffering  with  the  accused  as  to  the  terms  upon  which  they 
were  to  turn  him  loose  unpunished  and  unrebuked.  What  Court 
ever  before  said  to  the  Attorney  Genera],  or  public  prosecutor, 
stand  aside;  although  the  law  has  vested  in  you  alone  the  author- 
ity, and  imposed  upon  you  the  responsibility  of  determining  wheth- 
er public  justice  requires  the  prosecution  of  offenders  or  not,  yet 
we  will  disregard  your  opinion  on  this  subject,  we  will,  in  oppo- 
sition to  your  solemn  protest,  and  in  violation  of  all  law,  and  all 
usage,  usurp  your  authority,  and  decide  for  ourselves  that  the  ac- 
cused shall  not  be  prosecuted  ?  But  this  is  just  what  the  Court 
o(  Bishops,  by  virtue  of  their  "  inherent  power,"  have  done. 

It  appears  to  us  that  it  would  have  been  quite  as  justifiable,  and 
perhaps  more  candid,  for  the  Court  to  have  said  that  they  had  an 
inherent  power  like  the  Pope,  to  receive  confessions  and  to  forgive 
sins,  than  to  adopt  this  monstrous  doctrine  of  inherent  power.  It 
would  have  been  quite  as  justifiable  to  have  said,  that  a  Bishop 
bas  an  inherent  power  to  dispense  with  the  observance  of  the  ten 


4  -w 


commandments  as  they  have  to  dispense  with  the  canons  of  the 
Church,  and  the  rules  established  for  the  good  order  and  disci- 
pline of  the  Church.  And  the  only  difference  between  their  doc- 
trine of  inherent  power  and  the  Romish  doctrine  of  dispensation 
and  indulgences  is,  that  by  the  latter  the  inherent  power  of  dis- 
pensing with  law  resides  in  the  Pope  alone,  but  by  the  doctrine 
of  the  Court  of  Bishops  the  same  inherent  power  resides  in  each 
Bishop,  so  that  instead  of  having  but  one  Pope  and  one  dispensing 
power,  we  have  in  this  country  upwards  of  thirty  of  these 
petty  Popes,  exercising  the  power  of  dispensing  with  the  laws  of 
the  Church,  and  giving  either  indulgences  for  future  or  absolution 
for  past  offences.  It  is  painful  to  be  compelled  to  characterize  any 
decision  of  Christian  men  by  such  language,  but  a  decision  which 
aims  so  deadly  a  blow  at  the  purity  and  discipline  of  the  Episco- 
pal Church,  appears  to  us  to  call  for  the  severest  animadversion. 
We  have  said  also  that  this  decision  was  against  the  common 
law.  It  is  unnecessary  to  discjjss  a  proposition  so  plain.  The 
merest  tyro  in  the  law  knows  that  when  a  person  has  been  regu- 
larly indicted  and  arraigned  for  trial  by  the  proper  prosecuting 
officer,  that  the  Court  cannot  interfere  and  stop  the  prosecution 
without  his  consent,  nor  discharge  the  prisoner  without  allowing 
the  prosecutor  to  be  heard.  The  Court  of  Bishops  were  not  so 
ignorant  as  not  to  know  this.  On  the  contrary,  they  sinned 
against  light  and  knowledge,  and  what  proves  it,  is  the  course 
they  adopted  towards  the  three  presenting  Bishops.  After  the 
Court  had  concocted  this  mode  of  letting  Bishop  Doane  off;  after 
they  had  endeavored  in  vain  to  get  the  three  presenting  Bishops 
to  withdraw  the  presentment,  and  finally  communicated  to  the 
presenters  their  determination  to  dismiss  the  case,  the  three  Bish- 
ops sent  in  to  the  Court  a  written  request  to  be  heard  in  opposi- 
tion to  such  a  course.  And  what  did  the  Court  do?  Did  they 
hear  the  three  Bishops  in  opposition  ?  No,  they  sent  a  commit- 
tee to  them  to  request  them  to  withdraw  their  application  to  be 
heard.  Whv  was  this  done?  We  can  conceive  of  but  one  an- 
swer.  They  were  afraid  that  the  monstrous  injustice  and  illegal- 
ity of  such  a  course  would  be  so  exposed  by  the  indignant  elo- 
quence of  those  three  noble   champions  of   the  purity  of  the 


73 

Church,  that  some  of  the  timid  among  the  brethren  might  give- 
way,  and  thus  defeat  the  project  upon  which  they  had  previously 
agreed. 

We  think  we  hear  the  voice  of  one  of  the  Reverend  presenters 
appealing  to  the  Court  in  language  like  this  :  And  you,  my  breth- 
ren, who  serve  the  Lord,  remember  that  the  interests  of  virtue  are 
in  your  hands,  that  the  foibles  with  which  you  stain  it  become,  as 
I  may  say,  spots  upon  religion  itself.  Consider  how  much  the 
world  expects  from  you  ;  consider  what  the  Episcopal  Church 
expects  from  you  ;  consider  what  engagements  you  contracted 
toward  the  public  when  you  espoused  the  cause  of  piety,  and 
what  engagements  you  contracted  towards  the  Church  when  you 
took  upon  you  the  obligation  of  your  consecration  vows  ;  consider 
with  what  dignity,  what  fidelity,  what  respectability,  what  devo- 
tion, what  zeal,  you  ought  to  support  the  character  and  part  of 
servants  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  ministers  of  his  holv  Church.  Be- 
ware  lest  "  through  your  means  piety  become  a  fable  to  the  world, 
the  sport  of  the  wicked,  the  shame  of  sinners,  the  scandal  of  the 
weak,  and  the  stumbling  block  even  of  the  righteous.  Beware 
lest  through  you  vice  is  held  in  honor,  virtue  is  debased,  truth  is 
weakened,  faith  is  extinguished,  religion  is  annihilated  and  cor- 
ruption is  universally  spread,  and  as  it  was  foretold  by  the  pro- 
phet, desolation  perseveres  even  to  the  consummation  and  to  the 
end." 

But  the  three  Bishops,  over  persuaded,  agreed  to  withdraw 
their  application  to  be  heard,  and  to  substitute  for  it  a  protest 
which  was  to  be  placed  on  the  record.  This  was  assented  to  on 
the  part  of  the  Court.  The  three  Bishops  then,  with  the  aid  of 
their  counsel  and  in  their  presence,  drew  up  a  protest  and  signed 
it,  and  left  their  counsel  to  go  and  present  it  to  the  Court.  And 
it  was  understood  when  the  protest  was  thus  signed  that  the  three 
Bishops  were  to  be  at  liberty  to  publish  whatever  they  might  see 
proper  in  regard  to  the  action  of  the  Court  in  dismissing  the  present- 
ment. But  when  the  protest,  thus  signed,  was  presented  to  the  Com- 
mittee of  the  Court,  they  were  not  satisfied  with  it.  It  contained 
no  pledge,  express  or  implied,  that  the  mouths  of  the  three  Bishops 
should  be  sealed  up,  and  that  they  should  not  write  or  speak  any 
thing  against  this  illegal  decision.     What  did  the  Committee  then, 


74 

do?  Why,  they  went  to  work  persuading  the  three  Bishops  un- 
til by  their  importunity  they  induced  them  to  add  to  the  protest 
the  last  clause  of  the  last  sentence,  viz  :  "The  undersigned  are 
prepared  to  abide  such  action  as  the  Court  may  take  in  the  pre- 
mises." 

Having  secured  this  alteration  in  the  protest  and  thus,  as  they 
supposed,  effectually  enjoined  silence  on  the  three  Bishops,  the 
Court  was  then  prepared  to  consummate  a  decision  which  was 
to  place  upon  the  pure  vestments  of  the  Episcopal  Church  one  of 
the  deepest  and  darkest  stains  which  she  has  ever  received  since 
her  organization  in  the  United  States. 

Such  a  decision,  thus  made  bv  connivance  with  the  accused,  is 
in  direct  opposition  to  every  principle  of  the  common  law. 

We  have  said  it  was  in  opposition  to  canon  law.  What  is  the 
canon  law  of  the  American  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  ?  That 
learned  ecclesiastical  jurist,  Murray  Hoffman,  tells  us,  on  page 
64  of  his  Treatise,  "  1.  That  the  English  canon  law  governs,  un- 
less it  is  inconsistent  with,  or  superseded  by  a  positive  institution 
of  our  own.  2.  Unless  it  is  at  variance  with  any  civil  law  or 
doctrine  of  the  State,  either  recognized  by  the  Church  or  not  op- 
posed to  her  principles.  3.  Unless  it  is  inconsistent  with  or  inap- 
plicable to  that  position  in  which  these  States  are  placed." 

Again  he  says,  page  65,  "  And  it  is  to  that  law  (the  English 
canon  law,)  to  which  we  are  to  resort  for  guidance  in  all  unset- 
tled points.  We  shall  find  this  submission  more  useful  and  more 
noble  than  the  license  and  the  anarchy  of  an  unrestricted,  undi- 
rected and  unenlightened  judgment." 

We  find  nothing  in  the  pages  of  this  eminent  ecclesiastical  ju- 
rist to  sanction  the  vague  notion  of  "  in herent  power"  in  the  Bish- 
ops to  nullify  and  disregard  canons  and  constitutions,  common 
law  and  canon  law. 

To  prove  that  this  decision  is  uncanonicai  it  is  only  necessary 
to  refer  to  the  canon  for  the  trial  of  a  Bishop.  The  third  section 
of  the  fourth  canon  says,  that  "  upon  a  presentment  made  in  either 
of  the  modes  pointed  out  in  section  I.  of  this  canon,  the  course  of 
proceeding  shall  be  as  follows:"  and  then  proceeds  to  point  out 
the  duty  of  the  Court.  This  canon  the  Court  of  Bishops  have 
deliberately  contemned,  despised  and  trampled  under  foot     They 


75 

have  committed  treason  against  the  constitution  of  the  Church 
and  declared  open  rebellion  against  her  laws. 

Let  us  here  again  refer  to  the  work  of  the  Rev.  C.  Colton, 
above  cited.  In  page  180,  he  says,  "Canonical  authority  tells 
how  things  should  be  done,  and  what  things  may  not  be  done.  It 
defines  rights  and  privileges;  as  far  as  possible,  it  has  taken  care 
of  the  rights  of  all,  by  prescribing  the  duties  of  all,  directly  or 
indirectly,  in  the  shape  of  principles,  and  of  specific  cases  where 
it  could  not  give  precise  rules  for  all  cases." 

The  decision  is  also  against  the  Divine  law ;  for  Paul,  in  the 
5th  chapter  of  Timothy,  19,  20,  says,  "  Against  an  Elder  receive 
not  an  accusation  but  before  two  or  three  witnesses.  Them  that 
sin  rebuke  before  all,  that  others  also  may  fear."  In  this  case 
Bishop  Doane  confessed  that  he  had  sinned.  Did  the  Court  re- 
buke him.  No.  But  most  of  them  we  presume  congratulated 
him  upon  his  success;  a  success  obtained  by  triumphing  over  the 
canons  and  constitution  of  the  Church. 

Davis,  Solicitor  General  of  Massachusetts,  in  his  practical  trea- 
tise on  the  duty  of  Justices  of  the  Peace,  page  12,  says,  "  An 
agreement  to  stifle  the  prosecution  is  said  to  be  a  crime  most  de- 
trimental to  the  Commonwealth.  For  it  is  the  duty  of  every 
man  to  prosecute,  appear  against,  and  bring  offenders  to  justice. 
Any  agreement  to  the  contrary  is  said  to  be  void  by  the  common 
law,  the  civil  law,  the  moral  law,  and  all  laws  whatever.  You 
shall  not  stipulate  for  iniquity." 

All  writers  upon  our  laws  agree  that  a  polluted  hand  shall  not 
touch  the  pure  fountains  of  justice. 

But  perhaps  some  of  the  sticklers  for  inherent  power  may  say 
that  such  rules  were  only  intended  for  common  Judges,  and  not 
for  Bishops.  But  let  us  see  what  the  great  head  of  the  Church, 
from  whom  it  is  pretended  this  inherent  power  is  derived,  says. 
He  says,  "Judge  not  according  to  the  appearance,  but  judge 
righteous  judgment."  That  is,  lay  aside  all  favor,  and  affection, 
and  prejudice,  and  consider  the  case  attentively  and  impartially. 
Can  any  member  of  that  Court  lay  his  hand  on  his  heart  and  de- 
clare before  God  that  he  laid  aside  all  favor  to  Bishop  Doane, 
and  all  prejudice  against  the  laymen,  when  he  decided  that  case  ? 

But  the  last  and  most  serious  objection  to  that  decision  yet  re- 


76 

mains  to  be  stated ;  and  this  is,  that  it  is  a  direct  and  palpable 
violation  of  the  consecration  vow  which  each  Bishop  promised 
and  swore  to  perform.  By  that  vow  they  promised  and  swore 
"  conformity  and  obedience  to  the  doctrine,  discipline  and  worship 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States."  It 
cannot  be  denied,  that  the  trial  of  a  Bishop  is  a  part  of  the  disci- 
pline of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States. 
Murray  Hoffman,  in  his  able  Treatise  on  the  Law  of  the  Protes- 
tant  Episcopal  Church,  in  the  very  first  sentence  of  his  Treatise, 
speaks  thus  :  "  The  laws  and  regulations  concerning  the  discipline 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States,  may  be 
thus  arranged:  1st.  The  Constitution  and  Canons  of  the  General 
Convention,  &c.  He  then  enumerates  the  other  laws  and  rules. 
In  page  39  he  defines  the  meaning  of  the  term  discipline,  and  he 
tells  us  it  has  two  meanings;  first,  the  administration  of  punish- 
ment for  offences;  second,  the  regulation  and  government  of  the 
Church." 

The  trial  is  for  the  very  purpose  of  enforcing  "the  discipline 
of  the  Church."  The  third  section  of  the  third  canon  of  the  Gene- 
ral Convention  at  Philadelphia,  in  October,  eighteen  hundred  and 
forty-four,  enacts  that  if  "  the  accused  Bishop  appear,  before  pro- 
ceeding to  trial,  he  shall  be  called  on  by  the  Court  to  say  whether 
he  is  guilty  or  not  guilty  of  the  offence  or  offences  charged  against 
him ;  and  on  his  neglect  or  refusal,  the  plea  of  not  guilty  shall  be 
entered  for  him,  and  the  trial  shall  proceed." 

But  in  this  case  the  Court  deliberately  disregarded  and  con- 
temned this  canon,  establishing  a  part  of  the  discipline  of  the 
Church.  They  refused  to  call  upon  Bishop  Doane  to  plead  guilty 
or  not  guilty;  they  refused  to  let  the  trial  proceed;  they  prevent- 
ed the  three  Bishops,  who  had  equally  sworn  obedience  to  the 
discipline  of  the  Church,  from  performing  that  duty  which  their 
oaths  imposed  upon  them,  although  those  Bishops  protested  against 
this  invasion  of  their  rights,  and  this  obstruction  of  their  duty. 

The  Court  of  Bishops  cannot  plead  ignorance  of  their  duty,  for 
some  of  them  were  educated  to  the  law,  and  were  well  acquaint- 
ed with  its  principles.  But  it  was  not  necessary  to  be  lawyers, 
(o  ascertain  their  duty.  If  they  had  but  an  ordinary  acquaintance 
with  the  most  eminent  writers  of  their  own  Church,  it  would  have 


77 

sufficed  to  have  taught  them  their  duty.  Hooker  tells  us,  "  as  wc 
are  to  believe  forever  the  articles  of  evangelical  doctrine,  so  the 
precepts  and  discipline  we  are  in  like  sort  bound  forever  to  observe.'' 

But  this  decision  strikes  at  the  root  of  all  discipline.  It  is  say- 
ing to  Bishops,  You  may  lie,  cheat,  swear  false,  get  drunk,  com- 
mit all  the  crimes  in  the  catalogue,  for  there  is  an  inherent  power 
in  your  brother  Bishops  to  shield  you  from  all  punishment.  And 
when  the  discipline  of  the  Church  is  once  destroyed,  the  Church 
will  cease  to  be  of  any  value.  "A  Church  without  discipline,"- 
says  Hoffman,  page  480,  "  must  become,  if  it  is  not  already,  a 
Church  without  religion.  Some  coercive  and  excluding  power  is 
indispensable  wherever  faith  in  its  integrity,  or  life  in  its  purity, 
'  would  be  vindicated  or  sustained.'  " 

We  come  now  to  the  consideration  of  the  confession  of  Bishop 
Doane,  which  was  the  basis  on  which  the  dismission  of  the  case 
rested. 

A  more  disingenuous,  artful  and  evasive  paper  could  hardly 
have  been  prepared  even  by  the  joint  labor  of  Bishop  Doane,  his 
six  counsel  and  his  committee  of  seven.  It  does  not  appear  to 
us  to  manifest  a  single  sentiment  of  genuine  contrition  or  repent- 
ance. It  is  a  labored  effort  to  cover  up  and  conceal  crime  and 
immorality.  It  is  carefully  and  studiously  worded  to  induce  the 
reader  to  believe  that  all  his  indebtedness  grew  out  of  what  he 
calls  his  plans  of  Christian   education  ;  but  he  dare  not  say  so. 

t 

Did  he  owe  no  debt  when  he  left  Hartford  1  Did  he  owe  no  debt 
when  he  left  Boston  1  Did  he  contract  no  debt  for  ivine  after  he 
came  to  New  Jersey  ?  Did  he  contract  no  debt  for  building  Riv- 
erside 1  Did  he  contract  no  debt  for  his  private  library  of  six 
thousand  five  hundred  volumes  and  pamphlets?  Were  all  his 
debts  to  his  booksellers  and  publishers,  for  Christian  education  ? 
Was  the  debt  he  contracted  with  Munsisj  &  Borman,  for  fitting 
gas-works  in  his  house  at  Riverside,  for  Christian  education? 
There  were  many  debts,  as  he  well  knew,  which  were  contracted 
by  him  for  other  purposes  than  Christian  education,  and  therefore 
the  care  with  which  the  confession  is  worded. 

Again  he  says,  "  The  embarrassments  here  referred  to  were 
followed  by  a  long  and  well  nigh  fatal  illness,  which,  withdrawing 
him  entirely  from  the  business  which  he  had  carried  on  alone. 


78 

was  mainly  instrumental  in  the  entire  failure  of  his  pecuniary  af- 
fairs." What  does  he  mean  by  "  the  business  he  carried  on 
alone  ?"  Dees  he  allude  to  his  business  of  teaching  or  superin- 
tending the  schools?  If  so  he  was  not  alone,  for  all  his  pam- 
phlets, giving  the  terms  of  his  school,  show  that  he  had  able 
teachers  and  assistants.  Does  he  mean  by  it  that  he  was  alone 
in  attending  to  the  financial  concerns?  If  that  is  what  he  means, 
then  it  is  not  true,  for  in  addition  to  the  assistance  of  Mr.  Ger- 
main, who  indorsed  his  notes  and  used  to  go  to  Mr.  Deacon  to 
obtain  his  indorsements,  Bishop  Doane,  in  his  Protest  and  Appeal, 
page  37,  says,  "There  were  several  Banks  in  New  Jersey  at 
which  special  friends  of  the  undersigned  and  of  his  works  were 
influential ;  in  many  cases  as  Presidents  and  Cashiers,  on  which 
he  was  permitted  to  draw  short  drafts,  from  time  to  time,  to  be 
discounted  and  placed  to  his  credit.  At  maturity  they  were  duly 
met.  This  was  an  indulgence  granted  to  the  undersigned  by 
those  who  had  an  interest  in  his  works,  and  were  willing:  in  this 
way  to  assist  him  in  its  prosecution."  It  appears  then  that  he 
did  not  carry  on  his  pecuniary  or  financial  arrangements  alone, 
or  without  assistance.  But  we  say  again,  that  it  is  not  true  that 
"  his  sickness  was  mainly  instrumental  in  the  entire  failure  of  his 
pecuniary  affairs."  To  prove  this  we  have  only  to  refer  to  the 
report  of  his  own  Committee  of  Investigation.  In  their  first  re- 
port, page  28,  they  say,  "  The  business  of  the  Bishop  in  the  Bank 
at  Burlington,  as  exhibited  by  his  Bank  account,  was  nearly  half 
a  million  of  dollars  per  annum,  but  this  was  occasioned  by  hav- 
ing to  renew  his  old  floating;  indebtedness  every  two  or  three 
months,  and  make  large  and  constant  additions  to  it  at  each  re- 
newal. In  other  Banks  the  amount  was  large,  for  the  same  rea- 
son, but  much  smaller  than  this,  the  amount  in  the  Burlington 
Bank  being  the  aggregate  sum.  This  is  all  the  fictitious  credit 
which  the  Bishop  created  or  preserved  "  And  we  ask,  in  all  sim- 
plicity, if  a  half  a  million  of  fictitious  credit  was  not  enough  to 
break  any  man,  when  the  estimated  value,  according  to  his  own 
oath,  of  all  his  property,  real  and  personal,  over  and  above  the 
incumbrances  of  one  hundred  and  six  thousand  dollars,  was  only 
seventeen  thousand  four  hundred  and  eighteen  dollars  and  fifty 
cents.     But  this  famous  report  of  this  famous  Committee  further 


79 

tells  us,  on  page  14,  "  that  by  putting  his  notes  in  market  and  sell- 
ing them  at  a  ruinous  discount,  the  Bishop  increased  his  indebt- 
edness in  two  years  from  one  hundred  and  ninety  thousand  dol- 
lars to  two  hundred  and  sixty  thousand  dollars."  That  is  thirty- 
five  thousand  dollars  a  year  for  discounts.  How  many  years 
longer  could  he  have  preserved  his  fictitious  credit,  running  be- 
hind hand  at  the  rate  of  thirty-five  thousand  dollars  a  year?  The 
idea  that  his  failure  was  owing  to  his  sickness,  is  too  bald  to  de- 
ceive any  man  the  least  acquainted  with  business.  This  sickness, 
which  he  and  his  friends  appear  to  lament,  was  a  most  fortunate 
sickness  for  his  poor  creditors,  and  it  would  have  been  more  for- 
tunate if  it  had  happened  several  years  earlier;  it  might  have 
saved  them  a  great  deal  of  money  ;  and  certainly  Bishop  Doane 
saved  more  by  his  sickness  than  ever  he  saved  while  in  health  ; 
he  saved  thirty-five  thousand  dollars  a  year  in  discounts. 

Another  of  his  excuses  in  this  confession  is  as  follows :  "  In 
this  condition  of  things,  being  entirely  left  alone  and  without  ad- 
vice, every  step  which  he  advanced  involved  him  more  and  more 
deeply  in  pecuniary  embarrassments.  It  is  certainly  very  un- 
fortunate, if  with  so  many  friends  and  the  Trustees  of  the  Col- 
lege arso,  he  should  be  obliged  to  stand  "alone  and  without 
advice."  How  could  his  friends  and  Trustees  be  so  derelict  of 
duty?  Let  us  see  what  one  of  his  friends  says  on  this  subject, 
.Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaite,  than  whom  we  are  not  aware  the  Bishop 
recognizes  a  firmer  friend ;  in  his  examination  before  the  Inves- 
tigating Committee,  page  89,  speaking  of  the  fifty  thousand  dol- 
lar loan,  says,  "  It  was  made  under  the  advice  and  at  the  instance 
of  many  of  the  Bishop's  friends."  But  what  does  the  Bishop 
say  in  his  Protest  and  Appeal,  page  29?  He  says,  "The  decis- 
ion to  make  the  assignment  was  adopted  by  him  with  the  advice 
of  several  gentlemen  who  hold  the  very  highest  place  in  the  con- 
fidence of  the  community."  (He  takes  care  not  to  tell  us  the 
names  of  these  friends  who  hold  the  highest  place  in  the  confi- 
dence of  the  community  ;  if  he  had  we  could  and  would  have 
taken  issue  on  the  allegation,  but  it  is  purposely  left  vague.)  He 
then  speaks  of  the  assignees  and  says,  "  The  undersigned  referred 
the  whole  subject  entirely  to  their  judgment,  and  was  guided  in 
every  thing  by  their  advice."     What  becomes  then  of  this  pre- 


80 

text  that  he  acted  "  alone  and  without  advice?"  It  is  sickening 
\o  be  compelled  to  follow  a  Bishop  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
through  such  a  tissue  of  evasions  and  misrepresentations. 

But  there  is  a  very  curious  feature  about  this  case,  and  one 
which  is  to  us  wholly  unaccountable.  The  Bishop  does  not  in  his 
confession  say  any  thing  upon  the  charge  of  intemperance.  There 
was  no  proof  allowed  to  be  offered  by  the  presenters  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  the  ex  parte  evidence  of  the  Committee  of  the  Diocesan 
Convention  of  I\Te\v  Jersey  acquitted  him  of  every  charge  of  in- 
temperance. Why,  then,  and  upon  what  evidence  was  that  Com- 
mittee of  two  of  the  Bishops,  or  more  properly  a  sub-Committee, 
appointed  by  the  Committee  of  seven,  and  consisting  of  Bishops 
Polk  and  Otey  ?  Why,  we  ask,  was  this  sub-Committee  appoint- 
ed to  admonish  Bishop  Doane  upon  the  subject  of  intemperance  \ 
What  was  the  evidence  before  that  high  Court  which  authorized 
the  appointment  of  this  sub-Committee  for  this  purpose?  Had 
the  Court  such  ocular  demonstration  of  the  truth  of  the  charge 
as  to  justify  the  appointment  of  this  Committee  ?  Had  they  the 
proof  by  more  of  their  senses  than  one  that  this  charge  was  true  ? 
We  presume  so,  because  it  was  a  rule  very  pertinaciously  ad- 
hered to  by  some  of  the  Court,  on  the  trial  of  another  Bishop, 
that  by  the  mouth  of  two  witnesses  every  fact  should  be  estab- 
lished. If  the  Court  of  Bishops  really  believed  that  Bishop  Doane's 
habits  were  such  as  to  require  admonition  upon  the  subject  of  in- 
toxicating drinks,  how  could  they  justify  themselves  in  passing 
over  the  charge  without  any  confession  or  any  public  rebuke  \ 

In  regard  to  many  of  the  charges  this  pretended  confession  is 
wholly  silent,  it  neither  admits  or  denies  them.  He  says  nothing 
as  to  the  charge  of  signing  Mr.  Binney's  name  without  nuthority, 
nor  upon  the  charge  of  falsehood.  But  such  as  it  is,  it  is  never- 
theless sufficient  to  vindicate  the  four  laymen,  and  to  satisfy  the 
public  that  they  had  good  cause  for  the  course  they  adopted.  And 
it  is  sufficient* also  to  put  down  all  the  pretences  of  innocence  so 
pertinaciously  and  so  boldly  put  forth  by  Bishop  Doane  and  his 
friends,  his  Convention  and  his  Committee. 

For  the  purpose  of  showing  more  effectually  the  contrast  be- 
tween the  declaration  of  Bishop  Doane  and  of  his  Convention  with 
the  Confession,  we  have  placed  them  in  parallel  columns* 


81 


Bishop  Doane's  Denial  in  Feb- 
ruary, 1852. 
"  The  undersigned  simply  de- 
claring as  under  the  immediate 
eye  of  God,  his  entire  and  per- 
fect integrity  and  innocence  as 
to  all  and  singular  the  charges 
made  against  him."  {Protest 
and  Appeal,  page  17.) 

"It  is  of  the  first  necessity 
to  show  the  course  of  things  by 
which  a  man  who  challenges 
the  world  upon  the  ground  of 
perfect  honesty  of  purpose,  and 
unreserved  and  ruinous  self- 
sacrifice,  could  possibly  be  made 
the  subject  of  such  charges, 
even  from  such  a  source." — 
(Page  17.) 

"  He  was  satisfied  with  his 
own  sincerity  and  honesty." 
(Page  25.) 

"  In  perfect  fearlessness  of 
truth  he  stands  and  will  stand 
in  his  lot.  And  in  the  most 
solemn  manner  he  protests 
against  the  uncanonical,  un- 
christian and  inhuman  pro- 
cedure of  the  three  Bishops." 

The  address  made  by  the 
Committee  of  the  Diocesan  Con- 
vention to  the  first  Court  of 
Bishops,  which  is  dated  Cam- 
den, October  7,  1852,  and  sign- 
ed by  Samuel  L.  Southard,  Jas. 
A.  Williams,  Elias  B.  D.  Og- 
den,  Harry  Finch,  Charles  W. 
Rankin,  and  J.  W.  Miller,  says: 


Bishop  Doane's  Confession  in 
September,  1853. 

"  He  was  also  induced,  by 
his  too  confident  reliance  on  an- 
ticipated aid,  to  make  promises 
which  he  fully  expected  to  per- 
form, but  which  experience  has 
taught  him  were  far  too  strong- 
ly expressed. 

"He  was  also  induced,  for 
the  sake  of  obtaining  money  to 
meet  his  necessities,  to  resort  to 
methods  by  the  payment  of  in- 
terest on  exhorbitant  loan?, 
which  he  did  not  suppose  was  in 
contravention  of  law,  and  which 
common  usage  seemed  to  him 
to  justify. 

"He,  also,  in  entire  confi- 
dence in  his  ability  to  replace 
them,  made  use  of  certain  trust 
funds  in  a  way  he  deeply  re- 
grets, and  although  thev  have 
long  been  secured,  he  does  not 
now  justify. 

"  That  in  the  course  of  all 
these  transactions  human  infir- 
mity may  have  led  him  into 
many  errors,  he  deeply  feels, 
he  does  not  wish  to  justify  or 
excuse  ihem.  If  scandal  to  the 
Church  and  injury  to  the  cause 
of  Christ  have  arisen  from  them, 
they  are  occasion  to  him  of 
mortification  and  regret.  For 
these  things,  in  all  humility  and 
sorrow  before  God  and  man,  he 
has  always  felt  himself   liable 


82 


"Under  these  legitimate  and 
sacred  influences,  the  Diocese 
of  New  Jersey  has  examined 
the  charges  brought  against  her 
Bishop  and  found  them  to  be 
untrue." 

Report  of  Committee. 

"  Your  Committee  report  their 
unanimous  conviction,  as  the 
result  of  their  investigation,  that 
there  is  no  just  foundation  for 
the  charges  against  the  Bishop 
of  this  Diocese ;  and  further, 
that  the  evidence  has  produced 
in  their  minds  increased  confi- 
dence in  his  integrity  and  purity 
of  intent." 

Resolution  of  the  Convention 
of  New  Jersey. 

"  Resolved,  That  the  result 
of  this  investigation,  and  the  ev- 
idence now  laid  before  the  Con- 
vention, renew  and  strengthen 
the  evidence  heretofore  express- 
ed, in  the  integrity  of  the  Rt. 
Rev.  Bishop  of  this  Diocese, 
and  in  our  opinion  fully  excul- 
pate him  from  any  charges  of 
crime  or  immorality  against 
him." 

Second  Report  of  Committee. 
11  That  all  may  learn  the  in- 
justice done  to  the  Bishop  of 
this  Diocese  in  these  charges, 
and  the  triumphant  refutation  of 
his  character  from  these  char- 
ges impeaching  his  reputation 
and  habits  for  temperance  and 
sobrietv." 


to,  and  willing  to  receive  the 
friendly  reproofs  of  his  brethren 
in  Christ  Jesus,  and  especially 
of  the  Bishops  of  this  Church." 


It  has  been  stated  upon  the 
most  reliable  authority,  that  the 
Committee  of  seven  Bishops  ap- 
pointed a  sub-Committee,  con- 
sisting of  Bishops  Polk  and 
Otey,  to  admonish  Bishop  Doane 
upon  the  subject  of  intem- 
perance in  drinking. 


The  course  pursued  by  the  Court  has  been  attempted  to  be 
justified  on  the  plea  of  mercy.  And  it  is  said,  "  he  who  confess- 
ed and  forsaketh  his  sin  shall  obtain  mercy."  The  answer  to 
this  is :  First.  There  is  no  proof  that  Bishop  Doane  confessed 
his  sins,  much  less  forsook  them.  Second.  Mercy  is  to  be  exer- 
cised in  subordination  to  law,  and  is  not  to  override  law.  Justice 
may  be  tempered  with  mercy,  but  mercy  is  not  to  trample  upon 
justice.  Judges  sworn  to  administer  the  law  cannot  let  the  guilty 
go  quit,  upon  the  pretence  of  exercising  mercy.  The  preroga- 
tive of  mercy  belongs  to  the  executive,  and  not  to  the  judicial 
power.  But  even  the  executive  would  be  restrained  by  higher 
considerations  than  those  which  appear  to  have  actuated  the  Court 
of  Bishops,  from  exercising  this  power  on  such  an  occasion.  Ex- 
ecutive clemency  is  governed  by  such  considerations  as  are  pre- 
sented by  Dr.  Adam  Smith,  in  his  Theory  of  Moral  Sentiments, 
in  the  following  language  : 

"  When  the  guilty  is  about  to  suffer  that  just  retaliation  which 
the  natural  indignation  of  mankind  tells  them  is  due  to  his  crimes; 
when  the  insolence  of  his  injustice  is  broken  and  humbled  by  the 
terror  of  his  approaching  punishment ;  when  he  ceases  to  be  an 
object  of  fear,  with  the  generous  and  humane,  he  begins  to  be  an 
object  of  pity.  The  thought  of  what  he  is  about  to  suffer  extin- 
guishes their  resentment  for  the  sufferings  of  others  to  which 
he  has  given  occasion.  They  are  disposed  to  pardon  and  forgive 
him,  and  to  save  him  from  that  punishment  which  in  all  their  cool 
hours  they  had  considered  as  the  retribution  due  to  such  crimes. 
Here,  therefore,  they  have  occasion  to  call  to  their  assistance  the 
consideration  of  the  general  interest  of  society.  They  counter- 
balance the  impulse  of  this  weak  and  partial  humanity,  by  the 
dictates  of  a  humanity  that  is  more  generous  and  comprehensive. 
Thev  reflect  that  mercy  to  the  guilty  is  cruelty  to  the  innocent, 
and  oppose  to  the  emotions  of  compassion,  which  they  feel  for  a 
particular  person,  a  more  enlarged  compassion  which  they  feel 
for  all  mankind.'* 

Those  in  whom  the  prerogative  of  mercy  is  vested  by  the  law, 
should  never  forget  that  the  safety  of  a  guilty  man  is  an  outrage 
to  justice,  and  insult  to  social  order;  that  it  encourages  crime, 
and  makes  probity  tremble* 


84 

To  those  who  have  thoughtlessly  attempted  to  give  some  color 
of  justification  to  the  course  pursued  by  the  Court  of  Bishops,  by 
quoting  the  language  of  Shakspeare,  that 

"  The  quality  of  mercy  is  not  strained, 
It  droppeth  as  the  gentle  rain  from  heaven 
Upon  the  place  beneath.     It  is  twice  blessed,"  &c. 

We  would  oppose  the  sentiment  which  the  same  poet  puts  into 

the  mouth  of  Angelo,  when  he  says : 

"I  shew  it  most  of  all  when  I  shew  justice, 
For  then  I  pity  those  I  do  not  know, 
Which  a  dismissed  offence  would  after  gall ; 
And  do  him  right,  that  answering  one  foul  wrong, 
Lives  not  to  act  another." 

We  cannot  dismiss  this  subject  without  a  few  remarks  upon 
the  practical  operation  of  the  three  different  codes  of  Episcopal 
"  inherent  law,"  for  the  firsUime  invoked  in  this  case,  and  brought 
into  full  operation  by  Bishop  Doane,  under  the  sanction  of  the 
highest  ecclesiastical  judicatory. 

We  were  so  simple  as  to  suppose  that  charges  preferred  by 
four  communicants  of  the  Church  to  the  presenting  Bishops,  par- 
ticularly if  the  three  Bishops,  upon  full  investigaiion,  ascertained 
their  truth,  and  made  them  their  own  by  adoption,  were  just  as 
much  entitled  to  the  consideration  of  the  Court  of  Bishops,  under 
the  canons  of  the  Church,  as  if  such  charges  had  been  signed 
by  four  hundred  laymen.  We  have  never  been  able  to  find  any 
rule  or  practice,  any  law,  human  or  divine,  to  the  contrary.  But 
this  was  owing  to  entire  ignorance  of  the  codes  of  law  by  which 
the  case  was  to  be  governed.  These  codes  having  been  since 
authoritatively  announced  and  applied  to  the  case,  threw  new  light 
on  many  things  which  heretofore  appeared  to  us  inexplicable. 
Thus  in  the  early  stage  of  the  controversy  Bishop  Doane  made  it 
a  great  point,  that  but  four  laymen  signed  the  charges,  and  in  his 
Protest  and  Appeal,  page  7,  he  says,  "  He  has%read  the  two  with 
mingled  surprise  and  indignation  ;  with  surprise  that  three  per- 
sons bearing  the  responsibilities  of  Bishops  in  the  Church  of  God, 
would  be  found  to  take  action  against  a  Bishop  on  the  shewing 
of  four  persons.  Will  it  be  endured  that  they  shall  speak  of 
*  complaints'  in  the  Diocese  of  the  undersigned,  and  then  produce 
but  four?"  The  answer  we  gave  to  this  part  of  the  Protest  and 
Appeal,  was,  "that  in  legal  proceedings  to  found  a  presentment 


85 

of  a  grand  jury,  but  one  witness  was  required  ;  under  the  Mosaic 
and  Ecclesiastical  law,  but  two  witnesses  were  required  to  con- 
vict a  person  of  crime,  and  we  had  yet  to  learn  that  the  accusa- 
tion of  one  respectable  man  was  not  sufficient  to  ask  inquiry, 
which  was  all  the  Bishops  asked."  But  when  we  penned  this  sen- 
tence we  were  looking  at  this  subject  only  through  the  dim  light 
of  the  Bible  and  the  canons  of  the  Church,  and  the  practice  and 
principles  applicable  to  civil  Courts,  and  therefore  it  is  not  to  be 
wondered  at  that  we  should  have  considered  as  wholly  unimpor- 
tant a  circumstance  which  Bishop  Doane  considered  of  great 
consequence,  knowing,  as  he  told  the  Court  of  Bishops  at  Bur- 
lington, "  that  you  have  discretion,  then,  as  Bishops,  before  the 
canon,  and  outside  of  it,  and  I  must  add,  from  above  it."  This 
before,  outside  and  above  canon  discretion,  which  is  locked  up  in- 
side of  a  Bishop's  conscience,  which  nobody  but  a  Bishop  can 
know,  is  of  course  far  superior  to  any  other  law,  and  we  must 
humbly  apologise  for  setting  up  our  opinion  on  the  subject  at  all. 
We  cannot  and  do  not  now  pretend  to  say  that  under  this  code 
of  law  the  names  of  four  hundred  laymen  would  have  been  suf- 
ficient to  have  sent  charges  to  the  three  Bishops.  Bishop  Doane 
having  such  superior  knowledge  of  this  before,  outside  and  above 
code,  and  feeling  well  assured  that  we  had  violated  it  egregiously 
in  having  only  four  signatures  to  our  letter,  was  disposed  to  be 
sarcastic  upon  us,  and  he  concluded  what  he  said  upon  this  part 
of  the  subject  with  the  following  words :  "  How  far  the  Churchmen 
of  New  Jersey  will  permit  the  four,  whose  names  are  written  above, 
to  be  their  representatives,  the  undersigned  most  cheerfully  con- 
sents that  they  should  say."  If  by  Churchmen  of  New  Jersey  he 
means  Conventions  of  this  Diocese,  who  have  passed  resolutions 
exculpatory  of  Bishop  Doane  "from  any  charge  of  crime  or  im- 
morality" then  we  unhesitatingly  say,  we  could  never  be  true  re- 
presentatives of  the  sycophantic  servility  and  disgusting  toadyism 
of  such  Conventions.  When  such  Churchmen  as  A.  GifTbrd, 
Richard  W.  Howell,  and  Jabez  Pennington  were  deemed  by  the 
Convention  unfit  to  represent  them,  then  certainly  we  must  aspire 
in  vain  for  such  an  honor.  We  confess,  also,  that  in  consequence 
of  our  gross  ignorance  of  this  "  before,  outside  and  above"  law, 
that  we  fell  into  the  same  grievous  error  which  the  Ohio  layman 


86 

fell  into  when  he  said,  that  "  The  Church  has  provided  an  inde- 
pendent tribunal,  out  of  the  reach  of  prejudice,  under  the  most 
solemn  obligations  to  try  the  issue  between  the  parties  without 
fear,  favor  or  affection.  Befoi^e  a  Court  thus  composed,  let  Bish- 
op Doane  be  assured  that  no  abuse  of  the  prosecutors,  no  im- 
peachment of  their  motives,  no  assertion  of.  innocence,  however 
loud,  no  official  airs,  however  imposing,  will  avail  him  ;  there 
will  be  but  one  question,  of  innocence  or  guilt,  and  the  determin- 
ation of  that  question  will  depend  upon  the  oaths  of  disinterested 
witnesses."  Whereas  Bishop  Doane  being  familiar,  from  the  na- 
ture of  his  office,  with  the  unpromulgated  code  of  "  before,  out- 
side and  above  "  law,  knew  very  well  that  the  Court  was  under 
"  no  obligations  to  try  him  at  all,"  and  as  to  that  silly  notion  which 
the  Ohio  layman  entertained,  in  common  with  ourselves,  that  the 
Court  was  to  try  the  parties  without  fear.  If  laymen  have  a 
right  to  form  any  opinion  at  all  of  this  "  outside  "  law,  we  should 
say  that  fear  was  one  of  the  principal  elements  which  entered 
into  the  trial,  for  so  well  aware  was  he  of  the  value  of  this 
element,  that  one  of  his  partizans  commenced  operating  upon  it 
at  a  very  early  period,  long  before  the  sitting  of  the  Court ;  and 
distinctly  intimated  in  the  Diocesan  Convention,  that  if  a  certain 
course  was  persisted  in,  there  would  be  an  independent  Diocese, 
and  that  the  unity  and  harmony  of  the  Church  would  be  destroy- 
ed ;  and  this  threat  has  been  repeatedly  held  out  by  Bishop  Doane's 
friends,  if  not  by  himself,  and  was  doubtless  a  most  powerful  ar- 
gument under  the  "  outside  canon  "  code.  Inasmuch  as  Hawks 
and  Hoffman,  in  their  treatises  on  the  ecclesiastical  law  and  can- 
ons of  the  Church,  have  entirely  omitted  all  mention  of  these 
"  before,  outside  and  above  "  canon  codes,  we  were  at  a  loss  to 
know  what  these  codes  were,  or  how  to  be  used.  But  we  were 
not  left  long  in  uncertainty. 

Upon  the  assembling  of  the  Court  of  Bishops,  at  Camden,  we 
found  the  outside  canon  to  consist  of  two  United  States  Sena- 
tors, one  Ex-United  States  Senator,  one  Judge  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  New  Jersey,  a  half  dozen  Clergymen,  and  half  a  dozen 
of  Bishop  Doane's  creditors.  It  was  stationed  at  the  door  of  the 
building  occupied  by  the  Court,  and  at  the  corners  of  the  streets, 
so  as  to  enfilade  each  approach,  and  so  that  the  members  of  the 


87 

Court  could  neither  go  in  or  out  without  coming  within  point 
blank  range  of  this  formidable  battery.  Exposed  to  such  a  fire,  it 
was  apparent  that  the  Court  would  soon  have  to  capitulate.  We 
do  not  know  whether  the  Ohio  layman  has  not  subjected  himself 
to  ecclesiastical  censure,  under  this  outside  code,  for  expressing  the 
very  erroneous  opinion,  "  that  before  a  Court  thus  composed  no 
abuse  of  the  prosecutors,  no  impeachment  of  their  motives  could 
avail  him."  If  he  had  listened  to  Bishop  Doane's  speech  before 
the  Court  he  would  have  been  taught  that  the  abuse  of  prosecu- 
tors, according  to  the  "outside"  code,  is  not  only  proper  and  ad- 
missible, but  may  rightfully  form  a  principal  part  of  the  speech  of 
the  accused,  and  he  would  have  been  taught  the  absurdity  of  that 
strange  notion,  which  he  also  entertained  in  common  with  the 
four  Jersey  laymen,  viz:  "That  the  determination  of  the  question 
of  innocence  or  guilt  would  depend  upon  the  oaths  of  disinterested 
witnesses."  For  our  part  we  recant  all  such  erroneous  opinions, 
and  freely  confess,  that  according  to  the  "outside"  canon  code, 
the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the  accused  depends  not  upon  the  oath 
of  disinterested  witnesses,  but  upon  the  unsupported  assertions  of 
an  interested  party.  Not  being  acquainted  with  Episcopal  techno- 
logy, we  cannot  of  course  characterize  the  application  of  this 
outside  canon  law  by  its  appropriate  technical  term.  But, 
drawing  an  analogy  from  the  common  law,  we  should  say  that 
it  looks  to  us  very  like  what  lawyers  and  laymen  call  embra- 
cery. Jacobs  tells  us  Embracer  "Is  he  who,  when  a  matter 
is  on  trial  between  party  and  party,  comes  to  the  bar  with  one 
of  the  parties,  having  received  some  reward  so  to  do,  and  speaks 
in  the  case  or  privately  labors  the  jury,  or  stands  in  the  court  to 
survey  and  overlook  them,  whereby  they  are  awed,  or  influenced, 
or  put  in  fear  or  doubt  of  the  matter" — or  we  might  further  illus- 
trate our  silly,  vulgar  notion  of  this  outside  canon,  by  comparing  it 
to  what  in  regard  to  Legislation  is  commonly  called  Lobbyism. 

Marvellous,  indeed,  were  the  results  of  this  outside  canon.  We 
could  feel  the  effect  of  the  shot,  if  wTe  could  not  see  the  flasn  or 
hear  the  report.  One  of  the  effects  produced  by  it,  was  to  make 
some  of  the  Court  believe  that  the  allegation  made  by  the  three 
presenting  Bishops,  that  they  had  in  their  possession  a  memorial, 
signed  by  upwards  of  one  hundred  and  thirty  Episcopalians  of 


88 

New  Jersey,  requesting  them,  after  the  determination  of  the  Court 
at  Burlington,  to  make  a  new  presentment,  and  bring  Bishop  Doane 
to  trial,  was  untrue;  or  that  the  names  on  the  memorial  were  for- 
geries; or  that  the  persons  who  signed  it  were  only  "vagabonds" 
such  as  Bishop  Doane  represented  the  four  Laymen.  The  three 
Bishops,  if  they  heard  of  these  falsehoods,  could  not  run  round  to 
the  members  of  the  Court  to  contradict  them,  and  the  four  Lay- 
men knew  nothing  about  them  until  the  case  was  over. 

To  satisfy  the  members  of  the  Court  that  they  were  grossly 
imposed  upon  by  the  insinuations  and  reports  made  by  Bishop 
Doane  and  his  outside  canon,  and  that  the  statement  of  the  three 
Bishops  was  true,  and  that  the  persons  whose  names  were  on  that 
memorial  were  not  "  vagabonds"  and  that  their  names  were  not 
put  to  it  in  the  way  that  Bishop  Doane  put  Mr.  Binney's  name  to 
a  subscription,  (without  authority,)  but  with  their  own  proper 
hands,  we  state  that  this  memorial  contained  the  names  of  the 
Hon.  William  Chetwood,  the  Hon.  William  A.  Duer,  the  Hon. 
Charles  S.  Olden,  the  Hon.  Francis  B.  Chetwood,  Captain  Pegram, 
Capt.  Wm.  Salter,  U.  S.  N.,  Dr.  George  Chetwood,  Richard  Stock- 
ton, Esq.,  Walter  Rutherford,  Esq.,  and  Dr.  Edward  Harris.  This 
is  a  sample  of  the  names  attached  to  that  memorial.  We  ask  the 
Reverend  Judges,  if  they  don't  know  these  gentlemen,  to  inquire, 
and  compare  the  information  they  shall  receive  in  regard  to  them, 
with  the  representation  made  to  them  by  the  "outside  canon" 
and  if  they  do  not  find  that  they  have  been  completely  gulled 
and  deluded  in  regard  to  the  character  of  the  signers  to  that  me- 
morial, then  we  have  been  greatly  misinformed. 

By  the  before  canon  code,  we  suppose  to  be  meant,  the  code 
which  authorized  the  accused,  after  he  had  been  presented  in  a 
regular  canonical  way  to  anticipate  or  get  "before"  the  present- 
ing Bishops,  either  by  summoning  a  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of 
the  accused,  to  pass  judgment  of  condemnation  upon  them,  or 
by  getting  a  brother  Bishop  to  carry  a  letter  to  the  presiding 
Bishop  from  the  counsel  of  the  accused,  requesting  him  to  do  an 
act  which  would  render  nugatory  all  that  the  three  Bishops  had 
done,  and  then  calling  a  Convention,  appointing  a  Committee  of 
friends,  trying  the  case  without  evidence,  and  sending  the  "verdict'' 
of  acquittal  to  the  Court  of  Bishops.     The  only  other  part  of 


89 

these  three  Episcopal  codes  heretofore  unknown  to  laymen  which 
it  is  proper  we  should  illustrate,  is  the  "above"  canon  code. 

The  meaning  of  this  we  take  to  be,  that  if  the  three  presenting 
Bishops  prove  refractory  and  cannot  be  reduced  to  submission  by 
the  bombardment  of  the  "before"  canon  code,  or  siege  of  two 
weeks  by  the  outside  canon  code ;  if  there  is  still  a  majority  of 
the  Court  that  hold  out,  then  is  to  be  brought  into  action  the  princi- 
ples of  the  "above"  canon  code.  This  is  done  by  getting  a  Com- 
mittee of  the  Court,  appointed  with  authority  to  enter  into  a  nego- 
tiation with  the  Bishop  accused  of  crime,  to  see  if  they  can  induce 
him  "to  confess  his  innocence,"  upon  condition  that  the  Court  shall 
examine  no  further  into  his  crime,  but  let  him  go  without  day.  In 
this  way  the  accused  and  the  Court  override  the  general  canon 
for  the  trial  of  a  Bishop  that  is  get  "  above"  canon.  This  is  the 
last  application  of  the  above  canon  code,  and  the  effect  of  it  is 
so  overwhelming  and  decisive  that  it  not  only  goes  far  beyond  the 
avowed  object  of  Bishop  Doane  in  introducing  these  codes,  which 
was  merely  to  "  make  the  trial  of  a  Bishop  hard,"  but  it  makes 
the  trial  of  a  Bishop  impossible  upon  the  application  or  demand 
of  any  number  of  laymen.  This  at  least  is  the  construction  which 
laymen  will  put  upon  it ;  and  whether  the  construction  be  true  or 
false  the  consequences  to  the  Church  will  be  equally  disastrous. 
The  number  of  sincere  believers  who  will  be  deterred  by  this 
decision  from  uniting  themselves  with  the  Episcopal  Church,  will, 
in  our  opinion,  far  exceed  the  converts  which  all  the  sermons  of 
all  the  Bishops  who  comprised  that  Court  will  ever  make  during 
the  whole  course  of  their  lives. 

We  will  now  conclude  this  vindication  by  quoting  the  remarks 
of  one  of  our  most  eminent  lawvers,  and  of  one  of  our  most  emi- 
nent  divines,  in  reference  to  this  case.  The  lawyer  says,  "I 
confess  myself  unable  to  comprehend  the  action  of  the  Court, 
or  to  reconcile  it  with  my  ideas  of  law,  justice,  or  common  sense. 
The  paper  of  Bishop  Doane  does  not  cover  all  the  items  of 
charge,  but  leaves  them  neither  denied  nor  admitted  ;  for  instance, 
the  charge  connected  with  Mr.  Binney.  Some,  in  very  general 
and  vague  language,  he  seeks  to  justify  or  extenuate,  upon  the 
ground  of  good  intentions;  others  upon  the  plea  of  ignorance  of 
the  law.     I  have  been  accustomed  to  regard  a  plea  of  guilty  of 


90 

the  facts  charged  as  requiring  a  judgment  of  guilt,  never  as  the 
ground  for  entering  a  nolle  prosequi.  It  also  seems  to  me  that 
any  confession  or  acknowledgment  came  too  late  to  be  received 
with  any  favor,  or  regarded  as  having  any  merit.  It  came  after 
repeated  denunciations  of  all  concerned  in  the  prosecution  ;  after 
every  possible  effort  to  quash  the  proceedings  and  to  stifle  inquiry. 
It  was  a  mean  skulking  of  the  question  ;  a  sneaking  out  of  a  diffi- 
culty into  and  against  which  he  had  proudly  strutted.  He  gives 
the  lie  to  all  his  previous  language,  and  stultifies  his  Diocesan 
Convention.  Yet  all  this  the  Court  has  sanctioned,  and  not  only 
looked  at  it  without  censure  or  rebuke,  but  reallv  seemed  to  have 
regarded  it  as  obliterating  every  impurity.  In  my  humble  judg- 
ment the  Bishop  is  humiliated,  his  Convention  disgraced,  the  Court 
dishonored,  and  the  Church  most  seriously  injured.  Were  not  the 
whole  matter  so  painful,  I  should  pronounce  it  ineffably  ridiculous. 
As  a  finale,  I  should  like  to  see  the  countenances  of  the  Bishop 
and  his  friends,  when  they  meet  in  Convention  to  exchange  con- 
gratulations on  the  result." 

One  of  the  Reverend  Clergy  speaks  thus  of  the  decision:  "The 
more  I  think  of  the  action  of  the  Court  of  Bishops,  the  more  I  see 
how  illegal,  improper,  evasive  of  duty  and  dishonorable  to  the 
Court  it  was,  and  cruel  to  New  Jersey.  Think  of  the  condition 
of  the  Diocese,  in  having  a  Bishop  still  under  all  the  charges,  hav- 
ing escaped  trial  once  by  the  action  of  his  friends,  then  by 
his  own ;  first  by  pleading  the  action  of  his  Convention,  which 
the  next  Court  decided  to  have  been  illegal,  then  by  a  confession, 
which,  however  evasive,  shows  that  the  presentment  could  have 
been  proved.  A  Bisho,p  who  denies  all  and  abuses  all  who  do  not 
do  likewise,  and  then  when  trial  is  otherwise  inevitable,  takes  back 
his  denial  and  abuse  and  denies  himself;  a  Bishop  who  consents 
to  live  under  a  charge  of  drunkenness,  and  escapes  its  investiga- 
tion, under  an  acknowledgment  of  imprudence  in  debt — what  a 
condition  for  a  Diocese  to  be  in,  and  a  Bishop  to  be  in,  and  remedy 
by  law  now  out  of  the  question,  the  case  sealed  up,  the  disgrace 
graven  on  the  rock.  It  was  the  Court,  sitting  as  apologists  and 
compromisers,  and  hearers  of  any  thing  but  evidence,  weighers 
of  all  but  proof,  seeking  after  ways  of  getting  rid  of  the  responsi- 


91 

bility  of  deciding  under  the  law,  and  gladly  taking  the  far  heavier 
responsibility  of  deciding  against  law. 

WILLIAM  HALSTED. 

BENNINGTON  GILL. 

CALEB  PERKINS. 

PETER  V.  COPPUCK. 


APPENDIX. 


A. 

To  the  Rt.  Rev.  William  Meade,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  of 
Virginia,  the  Rt.  Rev.  Charles  P.  M'Jlvaine,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of 
the  Diocese  of  Ohio,  and  the  Rt.  Rev.  George  Burgess,  D.  D., 
Bishop  of  the  Diocese  of  Maine. 

For  a  long  period,  more  especially  for  the  two  years  last  past, 
grave  and  serious  charges  injuriously  affecting  the  moral  charac- 
ter of  the  Bishop  of  this  Diocese,  tending  to  impair  his  usefulness, 
and  to  bring  our  Church  under  reproach,  have  been  rife,  and  they 
have  continued  to  increase  until  they  have  reached  a  magnitude, 
and  assumed  a  form  which  the  blind  can  scarce! v  fail  to  see  or 
the  deaf  to  hear. 

Believing  that  the  best  welfare  of  the  Church  requires  that  the 
charges  should  be  promptly  met,  and  the  Church  relieved  of 
the  odium  under  which  she  rests,  while  the  same  continue  to  cir- 
culate undenied  and  unrefuted,  we  had  fondly  hoped  that  the  in- 
dividual implicated  would  have  sought  the  earliest  opportunity  of 
relieving  his  own  character  from  the  imputations  which  are  al- 
most daily  made  against  it,  and  of  dissipating  the  dark  cloud  of 
obloquy,  which  in  consequence  of  these  imputations  against  its 
Ecclesiastical  head,  now  greviously  mars  the  fair  character  o( 
our  Church. 

We  deeply  regret  that  the  Bishop  did  not  embrace  the  oppor- 
tunity which  was  offered  him  by  the  resolution  of  enquiry  pre- 
sented to  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  at  the  City  of  Burlington, 
in  1849,  of  meeting  and  repelling  the  rumors  and  charges  which 
were  then  known  to  be  in  current  circulation  against  him.  The 
(,ourse  then  taken  served  to  confirm  rather  than  diminish  the  sus- 
picions that  these  charges  had  foundation  in  truth.  Since  then 
we  have  waited  till  two  other  annual  Conventions  have  passed, 
at  either  of  which  the  Bishop  has  had  a  full  and  fair  opportunity 
of  demanding  an  investigation  into  the  truth  of  these  charges. 


94 

But  instead  of  demanding  an  investigation,  as  every  honorable  man 
in  society  feels  bound  to  do  when  imputations  arc  made  against 
his  character,  we  discover  a  manifest  intention  to  avoid  investi- 
gation, and  to  leave  these  rumors  and  charges  to  circulate  for  an- 
other year,  unchecked,  undenied  and  unrefuted. 

Acting  in  the  spirit  of  the  twenty-sixth  article  of  our  religion, 
which  declares,  that  it  appertained  to  the  discipline  of  the  Church 
that  inquiries  be  made  of  evil  ministers,  and  that  they  be  accused 
"  by  those  that  have  knowledge  of  their  offences,"  we  have  felt 
ourselves  called  upon  to  make  such  an  investigation  into  the  na- 
ture and  truth  of  these  charges  as  to  enable  us  to  perform  our 
duty  ;  and  upon  such  investigation  we  are  compelled  reluctantly 
to  say,  that  there  are  many  charges  publicly  made  against  the 
Bishop  of  this  Diocese,  which  ought  in  our  opinion  to  be  investi- 
gated under  the  canon  of  the  General  Convention,  for  such  case 
made  and  provided,  in  order  that  if  false,  their  falsity  may  be 
made  manifest,  or  if  true,  that  further  measures  may  be  taken, 
under  the  same  canon,  to  relieve  the  Church  of  the  odium  which 
they  inflict  upon  her.  Amongst  others  of  these  charges  visited 
by  public  rumor  upon  the  Bishop  and  the  Church  in  New  Jersey, 
the  following  have  come  to  our  knowledge. 

[Then  followed  nineteen  charges,  with  their  specifications.  Of 
these  nineteen  charges,  all  of  them  were  adopted  by  the  three 
Bishops,  and  made  the  grounds  of  their  presentment,  except  two, 
viz :  the  fifteenth  and  the  nineteenth  charges. 

The  fifteenth  was  as  follows  :  "  He  has  ground  the  face  of  the 
poor  and  oppressed  the  hireling  in  his  wages." 

The  proof  of  this  charge  will  be  found  in  the  letters  of  Mrs. 
Mary  Carse,  the  wife  of  his  gardner,  published  in  this  Appendix, 
letter  AA,  BB.  And  in  his  list  of  creditors  attached  to  his  as- 
signment, Appendix,  letter  C,  by  which  it  appears  that  he  is  in- 
debted to  the  servants  at  Burlington  College,  in  the  sum  of  one 
thousand  four  hundred  and  ninety  dollars. 

Charge  nineteenth  is  as  follows:  "His  conduct  while  presiding 
in  the  Conventions  of  his  Diocese  has  been  discourteous,  undigni- 
fied, unfair,  overbearing,  arbitrary  and  tyrannical,  wholly  desti- 
tute of  that  Christian  meekness  and  humility,  kindness  and  con- 
descension which  should  characterize  a  Christian  Bishop." 

In  proof  of  this  charge  we  refer  to  the  fact  that  in  the  Conven- 
tion held  at  Newark,  on  the  20th  day  of  May,  A.  D.  1852,  he 
called  Mr.  Halsted  a  chartered  libertine.  And  to  the  report  of 
the  sayings  and  doings  of  the  Special  Convention,  held  at  Newark, 
on  the  27th  dav  of  October,  1852.  One  or  two  extracts  from 
that  report  will  be  all  that  is  necessary  to  quote  here.  The  Hon- 
orable James  Parker  said,  "I  rise,  sir,  in  behalf  of  those  whom 
I  represent,  to  protest  against  the  tyrannical  conduct  of  the  Bish- 


95 

op.  The  Bishop  has  not  authority  to  stop  debate.  I  protest 
against  his  assumption  of  it.  You  have  destroyed  the  freedom 
of  debate,  sir.  You  refused  to  put  a  question  offered  by  the 
gentleman  before  me,  interrupted  him  in  his  remarks,  and  noth- 
ing, sir,  but  my  grey  hairs,  it  seems,  excused  me  from  like  inter- 
ruption. You  may  consider  me,  for  that  matter,  as  young  as  you 
please.  Anybody  that  came  in  and  saw  the  Bishop  speaking, 
would  have  thought  him  excited  by  something  very  uncommon. 
1  protest  against  this  attempt  to  arrest  debate." 

A^ain.  The  Honorable  James  Parker  said,  "1  move,  sir,  that 
the  Bishop  is  out  of  order.  You  (addressing  himself  to  the  Bish- 
op,) are  as  disorderly  a  man  as  anybody  in  this  Convention." 

Mr.  Courtlandt  Parker  having  offered  the  Convention  the  fol- 
lowing resolution,  viz  : 

"Resolved,  That  in  the  opinion  of  this  Convention,  the  fair 
fame  of  the  Bishop  cannot  be  effectually  rescued  from  accusa- 
tions against  it  by  any  ex  parte  inquiry,  however  thorough,  nor 
without  a  canonical  trial." 

The  Bishop  said,  "  This  is  worse  than  the  other.  Pll  put  no 
such  resolutions.  Pm  a  Bishop.  I'm  Bishop  of  this  Diocese.  Pen 
Bishop  of  this  Diocese  in  this  Convention,  and  Pll  stand  this  no 
longer.  I  have  been  before  the  Court  of  Bishops.  I  took  the 
course  of  that  Court;  and  I  am  here.  But  I  will  not  put  a  reso- 
lution like  this.     What  child's  play  !"] 

We  believe  that  the  foregoing  charges  and  specifications  can 
be  sustained  by  proof,  and  we  therefore  present  them  to  you,  three 
of  the  Rt.  Rev.  the  Bishops  of  the  Church,  in  order  that  you  may 
take  such  measures,  in  accordance  with  the  canons  of  the  Church, 
in  relation  to  the  same,  as  your  official  duty  and  your  well  known 
devotion  to  the  welfare  of  the  Church  mav  seem  to  vou  to  re- 
quire.  In  this  communication  we  have  by  no  means  embraced 
all  that  is  charged  against  Bishop  Doane  by  public  rumor.  Other 
matters  of  a  like  dishonorable  and  unbecoming  character,  we 
have  reason  to  believe,  will  develope  themselves  to  your  official 
notice  whenever  you  shall  see  fit  to  enter  upon  the  investigation. 
In  making  these  charges  we  are  actuated  by  no  motives  of  per- 
sonal hostility  against  the  Bishop,  but  our  motive  is  to  sustain  and 
vindicate  the  reputation  of  that  Church  of  which  we  are  humble 
members. 

Signed,  WILLI  AM  HALSTED, 

CALEB  PERKINS, 
PETER  V.  COPPUCK, 
BENNINGTON  GILL. 
New  Jersev,  August,  1851. 


96 

The  following  is  a  true  copy  of  an  affidavit  made  by  Michael 
Hays : 

New  Jersey,  ss. 

Michael  Hays,  of  the  county  of  Burlington,  being  duly  sworn 
according  to  law,  doth  depose  and  say,  that  he  did,  at  the  request 
of  George  W.  Doane,  Bishop  of  New  Jersey,  indorse  the  pro- 
missory notes  of  the  said  George  W.  Doane  to  a  large  amount, 
in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty- 
eight,  which  notes  so  indorsed  were,  as  he  supposed,  discounted 
at  some  Bank,  and  were  from  time  to  time  renewed.  And  this 
deponent  further  says,  that  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  sometime 
in  the  month  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  forty-eight,  came  to  this  deponent  with  notes  drawn 
by  said  George  W.  Doane,  payable  to  this  deponent,  amounting  in 
the  whole  to  six  thousand  dollars,  but  without  the  date  being  in- 
serted in  said  notes,  and  that  the  said  George  W.  Doane  requested 
this  deponent  to  indorse  these  notes,  being,. as  this  deponent  be- 
lieves, six  in  number,  of  one  thousand  dollars  each;  and  the  said 
George  W.  Doane  to  induce  this  deponent  to  indorse  them,  told 
this  deponent  that  he  was  going  away  from  home,  and  that  he 
wanted  to  make  preparation  to  keep  the  thing  agoing  until  he 
came  back,  and  until  the  loan  money,  meaning  the  fifty  thousand 
dollars  which  had  been  borrowed  on  mortgage,  should  come  in, 
and  the  notes  paid  ;  that  people  had  given  their  notes  for  the  loan, 
but  that  the  notes  had  not  come  due  yet.  And  this  deponent  fur- 
ther says,  that  relying  upon  the  assurances  of  the  said  George 
W.  Doane  that  these  six  notes  of  one  thousand  dollars  each  were 
to  be  used  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  other  notes  of  the  same 
amount  which  had  been  discounted,  and  which  were  coming  due 
within  a  short  time,  and  during  the  expected  absence  of  the  said 
George  W.  Doane,  he,  this  deponent,  did  reluctantly  indorse  the 
said  notes,  amounting  to  six  thousand  dollars,  although  his  liabil- 
ity for  the  said  George  W.  Doane  for  previous  indorsements  was 
so  large  that  he  was  unwilling  to  increase  it,  and  had  previously 
made  up  his  mind  not  to  indorse  any  more  notes  for  the  said 
George  W.  Doane  to  increase  his  responsibility.  And  this  depo- 
nent further  says,  that  of  the  notes  indorsed  by  said  deponent  for 
said  George  W.  Doane,  four  thousand  dollars  of  them  were  pro- 
tested, and  this  deponent  indorsed  other  notes  to  the  amount  ot 
four  thousand  dollars  to  take  up  the  protested  notes.  And  this 
deponent  further  says,  that  after  he  had  indorsed  said  last  men- 
tioned notes,  he  applied  to  said  George  VV.  Doane  to  obtain  from 
him  the  four  protested  notes,  for  the  payment  of  which  he  had 
indorsed  the  four  last  mentioned  notes,  the  said  George  W.  Doane 
delivered  to  this  deponent  two  of  said  notes,  and  told  him  that 
Mr.  Reuben  J.  Germain  had   the  other  two  ;  and  then  this  depo- 


97 

nent  applied  to  the  said  Mr.  Germain  for  said  notes,  and  the  said 
Mr.  Reuben  J.  Germain  replied  that  he  knew  nothing  about  them. 
And  thi^  deponent  further  says,  that   he   has   been  called  upon  to 
pay  the  said  two  last  mentioned  notes,  for  the  payment  of  which 
the  said  George  W.  Doane  had  obtained   two  other  indorsements 
of  the  same  amount  from  this  deponent  to  take  up  said  notes,  and 
which  notes  the  said  George  W.   Doane  informed   this  deponent 
had  been  taken  up  and  were  in  the  hands  of  the  said  Mr.  Reuben 
J.  Germain.     And  this  deponent   verily  believes,  that  under  pre- 
tence of  getting  this  deponent  to  indorse  notes  for  the  purpose  of 
renewing  notes  w7hich  he  had  previously  indorsed  and  which  were 
coming  due,  he  must  have  obtained  from  this  deponent   indorse- 
ments to  the  amount  of  ten  thousand  dollars,  which  were  not  ap- 
plied to  the  payment  of  the  old  notes,  but  were   applied  by  said 
George  W.  Doane  to  other  objects  and   for   other  purposes  than 
the  payment  of  the  notes   they  were  intended   to  renew,  and  by 
means   of  which    misapplication    and    misappropriation    of  said 
notes,  the  liability  of  this  deponent  for  the  said  George  W.  Doane 
was,  without  this  deponent's  knowledge  or  consent,  increased  to 
an  amount  of  ten  thousand  dollars   at  least.     And  this  deponent 
further  savs,  that  the  said  George   W.  Doane,  on  or  about  the 
twentieth  dav  of  October,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  forty-nine,  entered  into  an  agreement  with  this 
deponent,  that  if  he,  this  deponent,  would  compromise  his  liability 
or  his  indorsements  for  said  George  W.  Doane,  without  a  contested 
suit  at  law,  in  the  best  manner  he  could,  that  he,  the  said  George 
W.  Doane,  would  secure  to  him  the   payment  of  the  one-half  of 
such  sum   of  money  for  which  said   compromise  was   made,  by 
paying  this  deponent  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars  a  year,  with 
interest,  until  the  said  one-half  should  be  paid;  and  that  the  se- 
cond instalment,  under  said  agreement,  became  due   in  January 
last,  and  that  he  called  upon   the  said  George  W.  Doane  and  re- 
quested him  to  pay  this  deponent  the  said  sum  of  money,  but  the 
said  George  W.  Doane  said  he  could  not  pay  until  May,  but  that 
in  May  term  he  should  receive  his  salary  from  the  schools,  and 
then  it  should  be  paid,  and  that  this  deponent  should  have  his  mo- 
ney on  the  tenth  of  May,  certain.     And  this  deponent  called  on 
said  George  W.  Doane  about,  the  twentieth  day  of  May  last,  and 
the  said  George  VV.  Doane  told   this  deponent  he  could  not  pav 
the  said  money.     Deponent   then   said,   "  Bishop,  this  is  a  disap- 
pointment," and  that  if  he  could  not  get  his  money  he  should  first 
present  him  to  the  Church,  and  if  he  could  not  get  redress  in  that 
way  he  must  resort  to  the  law.     And  the  said  George  W.  Doane 
then  said,  that  if  this  deponent  did  that,  he  would   put  himself  on 
his  defence,  and  this  deponent  would   get  nothing.     Deponent  re- 
plied, "  I  get  nothing  as  it  was.     I  could  do  no  worse."     And  the 

G 


98 

said  George  W*.  Doane  then  said,  that  this  must  be  the  last  inter- 
course between  them.  This  deponent  ihen  left  him,  and  drew  up 
a  memorial  to  present  to  the  Episcopal  Convention,  and  gave  it 
to  a  member  of  said  Convention  to  present;  and  he  believes  that 
the  said  memorial  would  have  been  presented  to  said  Convention, 
had  not  the  said  Convention^  contrary  to  all  previous  practice, 
adjourned  the  first  day  of  its  session. 


Sworn  and  subscribed  this  21st  day 
of  July,  A.  D.  1851,  before  me, 
Wm.  Halsted,  Jun.,  M.  C.  C. 


MICHAEL  HAYS. 


B. 

TO  THE  BISHOPS  OF  THE  PROTESTANT  EPISCOPAL 
CHURCH  IN  THE  UNITED  STATES. 

A  Presentment  preferred  by  three  Bishops  of  the  Protestant  Epis- 
copal Church  in  the  United  States  of  America,  against  the  Rt° 
Rev.  George   Washington  Doane,  a  Bishop  of  said  Church,  be- 
fore the  Bishops  of  the  said  Church. 

We  the  undersigned,  William  Meade,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  in  the  Diocese  of  Virginia,  Charles 
Pettit  Mcllvaine,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  the  said  Church,  in  the  Diocese 
of  Ohio,  and  George  Burgess,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  the  said  Church, 
in  the  Diocese  of  Maine,  do,  by  virtue  of  the  authority  reposed 
in  us  by  the  canons  of  the  said  Church,  present  to  the  Bishops  of 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  in  the  United  State?  of  America  :. 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of  the  said 
Church,  in  the  Diocese  of  New  Jersey,  is  guilty  of  crime  and 
immorality  in  the  particulars  herein  after  specified, — 

That  is  to  say, 

Specification   1st. 
In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington   Doane,  at  divers  times  dur- 

DO 

ing  the  period  in  which  he  has  held  and  exercised  the  office  of 
Bishop  of  the  Church  aforesaid,  did,  in  the  State  and  Diocese  of. 
New  Jersey,  contract  numerous  and  large  debts,  beyond  his 
means  of  payment,  at  their  respective  dates,  and  which  at  their 
respective  dates  he  had  no  reasonable  and  definite  prospect  of 
being  able  to  pay — the  said  debts  amounting,  on  or  about  the  26th 
of  March,  1849,  to  not  less  than  the  sum  of  two  hundred  and 
eighty  thousand  dollars,  and  probably  amounting  to  three  hundred 


99* 

thousand  dollars  then  unpaid.  And  the  whole  property,  real, 
personal  and  mixed,  of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  at 
the  date  last  aforesaid,  not  exceeding  in  value  the  sum  of  one 
hundred  and  thirty  thousand  dollars,  of  which  property  the  real 
estate  was  bound  by  liens  to  the  extent  of  one  hundred  thousand 
dollars,  all  which  conduct  was  immoral  and  dishonest,  and  unbe- 
coming a  Bishop  of  said  Church. 

Specification  2d. 
In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid, 
for  the  purpose  of  excusing  the  contracting  of  the  debts  specified 
in  the  1st  Specification,  in  a  certain  printed  pamphlet  published 
by  him,  bearing  date  on  or  about  the  9th  day  of  February,  1852, 
in  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  entitled  "The  Protest  and  Appeal  of 
George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  of  New  Jersey,  as  aggrieved 
by  the  Rt.  Rev.  William  Meade,  D.  D.,  the  Rt.  Rev.  George 
Burgess,  D.  D.,  and  the  Rt.  Rev.  Charles  Pettit  Mcllvaine,  D.  D., 
and  his  reply  to  the  false,  calumnious  and  malignant  representa- 
tions of  William  Halsted,  Caleb  Perkins,  Peter  V.  Coppuck,  and 
Bennington  Gill,  on  which  they  ground  their  uncanonical,  un- 
christian  and  inhuman  procedure  in  regard  to  him,"  did  untruly 
state,  "The  undersigned"  (meaning  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane)  "frave  up  his  property  of  every  form,  to  meet,  so  far  as 
it  might,  a  debt  not  personal  to  himself, — his  private  income  be- 
ing much  more  than  equal  to  his  private  expenditure — but  grow- 
ing out  of  his  venture  for  Christian  education  in  the  two  institu- 
tions above  named,"  (meaning  St.  Mary's  Hall,  a  school  for 
females,  and  Burlington  College,  a  school  for  boys,)  "and  his  self- 
disregard,  to  serve  the  Church,  to  adorn  and  dignifv  his  native 
State,  and  shed  the  light  of  Christian  learning  on  the  land." 

Whereas,  in  truth  and  fact,  only  a  small  part  of  the  debt  in  the 
said  passage  mentioned,  not  amounting  to  one-half  thereof,  was 
incurred  on  account  of  those  institutions  above  named,  or  of 
either  of  them,  or  ever  enured  to  the  benefit  of  those  institutions, 
or  of  either  of  them;  and  as  well  the  said  school  of  St.  Marv's 
Hall  as  Burlington  College,  were  the  private  property  and  adven- 
tures of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  and  carried  on  for 
his  private  benefit;  and  even  if  said  debt  had  been  incurred  in 
such  venture,  yet  was  the  contracting  of  such  debt  beyond  the 
means  of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  to  pay,  immoral 
and  unchristian. 

Specification  3d. 
In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid, 
having  at  divers  times  during  the  years  1817  and   1818)  procured 


100 

one  Michael  Hays,  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  to  indorse  divers 
promissory  notes  for  more  than  ten  thousand  dollars,  for  the  ac- 
commodation of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  said  notes  or 
most  of  them  being  without  date,  when  delivered  to  said  George 
Washington  Doane,  to  be  discounted  at  his  convenience,  did  after- 
wards and  during  the  years  1848  and  1849,  when  said  notes 
which  had  been  discounted  for  said  George  Washington  Doane, 
were  approaching  maturity,  procure  said  Michael  Hays  to  in- 
dorse other  notes  to  the  amount  of  ten  thousand  dollars,  under 
the  pretext  and  upon  the  assurance  that  said  last  mentioned  notes 
should  be  applied  and  used  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  the  notes 
or  some  of  them  formerly  given  for  discount ;  and  said  Michael 
Hays,  confiding  in  such  representations,  did  indorse  noies  for 
various  sums  of  money,  amounting  to  ten  thousand  dollars,  said 
notes  being  blank  as  to  the  dates  thereof,  when  delivered  to  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  and  delivered  the  same  to  him  for 
the  purpose  aforesaid;  but  said  George  Washington  Done  failed 
to  use  said  notes  given  for  renewal  of  other  notes,  for  that  pur- 
pose, and  used  the  same  for  other  purposes,  having  them  discount- 
ed, or  passed  to  other  persons  for  value,  and  left  said  first  men- 
tioned notes  to  be  protested,  thereby  fraudulently  increasing  the 
liability  of  said  Michael  Ha  vs.  by  the  sums  of  money  for  which 
the  notes  so  given  for  renewal  of  other  notes  were  drawn,  to  wit, 
to  the  amount  of  ten  thousand  dollars. 

And  in  particular,  that  in  the  month  of  May,  1848,  said  George 
Washington  Doane  having  procured  the  indorsements  of  said 
Michael  Hays,  on  divers  notes  discounted  for  the  accommoda- 
tion of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  before  that  time,  procur- 
ed said  Michael  Hays  to  indorse  six  other  promissory  notes  for 
one  thousand  dollars  each,  payable  to  said  Michael  Hays,  but 
without  the  dates  being  inserted  therein,  and  deliver  them  to  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  upon  the  pretext  and  representation 
that  notes  previously  indorsed  by  said  Michael  Hays  would  fall 
due  during  the  contemplated  absence  of  said  George  Washington 
Doane,  and  that  he  needed  these  six  notes  to  renew  those  so  about 
to  fall  due,  till  he  could  realize  the  proceeds  of  the  loan  of  fifty 
thousand  dollars  then  just  negotiated  ;  and  said  George  Washing- 
ton Doane  having  under  those  representations  and  for  that  pur- 
pose obtained  said  six  notes  so  indorsed,  did  not  apply  them  in 
renewal  of  notes  previously  indorsed  by  said  Michael  Hays,  but 
used  and  applied  them  to  other  purposes,  whereby  said  Michael 
Hays  was  fraudulently  made  responsible  for  the  whole  amount  of 
said  notes  over  and  above  his  previous  liability  for  said  George 
Washington  Doane;  and  that  said  George  Washington  Doane 
having  obtained,  in  the  year  aforesaid,  indorsements  of  said 
Michael  Hays,  on  notes,  of  which,  notes  to  the  amount  of  four 


101 

thousand  dollars  were  protested  for  non-payment,  and  said  Michael 
Hays  having  indorsed  other  notes  for  four  thousand  dollars,  for 
the  purpose  of  taking  up  said  protested  notes,  and  having  deliver- 
ed the  same  to  said  George  VVashington  Doane,  for  that  purpose, 
applied  afterwards  to  him  for  the  four  protested  notes,  when  said 
George  VVashington  Doane  delivered  him  two  of  said  protested 
notes,  and  referred  him  to  Reuben  J.  Germain  for  the  other  two, 
under  the  false  pretence  that  said  R.  J.  Germain  had  them  ;  but 
on  application  to  said  R.  J.  Germain,  he  replied  that  he  knew 
nothing  of  those  two  notes ;  and  said  two  notes  were  not  in  fact 
taken  up  by  said  George  Washington  Doane,  with  the  notes  given 
him  for  that  purpose;  but  said  Michael  Hays  was  compelled  to 
pay  said  two  protested  notes,  and  said  George  Washington  Doane 
fraudulently  misapplied  the  two  notes  indorsed  for  the  purpose  of 
taking  them  up,  to  other  purposes,  whereby  the  liability  of  said 
Michael  Hays  was  increased  for  said  George  Washington  Doane, 
by  his  fraudulent  misapplication  of  said  two  notes,  to  the  amount 

of  two  thousand  dollars. 

» 

Specification  4th. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having 
at  various  times  during  the  years  1847  and  1848,  procured  one 
Joseph  Deacon,  in  New  Jersey,  to  indorse  divers  promissory  notes 
for  the  accommodation  of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  for 
divers  large  sums  of  money,  amounting  in  the  aggregate  to  over 
the  sum  of  eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  which  notes  had 
not  the  dates  inserted  when  so  indorsed  and  delivered  to  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  to  be  discounted  at  his  convenience; 
and  said  notes  having  been  discounted  for  the  use  of  said  George 
Washington  Doane,  whereby  said  Joseph  Deacon  was  liable  there- 
on to  that  amount ;  he,  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  pre- 
tending that  he  was  desirous  of  renewing  said  notes,  did  produce 
to  the  said  Joseph  Deacon  divers  notes  for  various  sums  of  money, 
and  mostly  without  the  dates  being  inserted  therein,  at  several 
times  during  1848  and  1849,  and  procured  and  induced  the  said 
Joseph  Deacon  to  indorse  sundry  of  those  promissory  notes,  for 
the  accommodation  of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  for 
divers  large  sums  of  money,  amounting  in  the  aggregate  to  the 
sum  of  eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  which  notes  had  not 
the  dates  inserted  when  indorsed,  under  the  false  pretence  and  as- 
surance that  said  last  mentioned  promissory  notes  were  needed 
for  the  renewal  of  those  whereon  said  Joseph  Deacon  was  already 
liable,  and  that  said  new  notes  should  be  used  only  for  the  purpose 
of  such  renewal;  and  said  Joseph  Deacon  confiding  in  such  false 
assurances,  having  in  the  years  last  aforesaid,  in  New  Jersey, 


102 

indorsed  for  said  George  Washington  Doane,  for  his  accommoda- 
tion, at  his  request,  the  said  noles,  and  delivered  them  to  him  or 
his  agents,  for  the  sole  purpose  of  renewing  notes  whereon  said 
Joseph  Deacon  was  already  liable,  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane  did  not  use  and  apply  the  said  notes  for  the  purpose  of 
renewing  such  former  notes,  but  did  cause  the  same  to  be  dis- 
counted and  passed  away  to  third  parties,  so  as  to  increase  the 
liabilities  of  said  Joseph  Deacon,  for  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane,  to  the  full  amount  of  eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars. 

That  among  the  notes  making  the  eleven  thousand  five  hun- 
dred dollars  aforesaid,  was  a  certain  note  for  one  thousand  dol- 
lars, indorsed  by  the  said  Joseph  Deacon,  for  the  accommodation 
of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  and  within  the  years  1848 
and  1849,  discounted  for  his  benefit  by  the  Camden  Bank;  and 
that  said  George  Washington  Doane  procured  said  Joseph  Dea- 
con to  indorse  and  deliver  to  one  Reuben  J.  Germain,  another 
note  for  one  thousand  dollars,  upon  the  false  pretext  and  assurance 
that  such  new  note  should  be  substituted  for  the  said  former  note, 
in  renewal  of  the  same  ;  but  said  Joseph  Deacon  having  indorsed 
such  new  note  and  delivered  the  same  to  the  said  Reuben  J.  Ger- 
main, for  the  purpose  aforesaid,  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane  did  not  apply  and  use  said  note  in  renewal  of  and  substi- 
tution for  the  said  former  note,  but  on  the  contrary,  allowed  the 
said  former  note  to  be  protested,  and  transferred  said  new  note 
to  another  person,  so  as  to  double  the  liability  of  said  Joseph  Dea- 
con, by  the  fraudulent  misapplication  of  said  new  note  whereon 
he  became  liable  to  such  third  party,  and  said  George  W.  Doane 
falsely  stated  in  writing  to  said  Joseph  Deacon,  that  said  former 
note  had  been  renewed  by  said  Camden  Bank. 

That  two  other  notes,  part  of  said  eleven  thousand  five  hun- 
dred dollars,  to  wit,  one  for  the  sum  of  seven  hundred  dollars, 
and  one  for  the  sum  of  seven  hundred  and  fifty  dollars,  in  the 
years  aforesaid,  were  indorsed  by  said  Joseph  Deacon,  for  the  ac- 
commodation of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  and  discounted 
by  the  Mechanics  Bank  of  Burlington  ;  and  said  Joseph  Deacon, 
at  the  instance  of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  indorsed  and 
delivered  to  said  Doane,  two  other  notes  of  like  amount,  for  the 
renewal  of  said  former  notes,  on  the  false  pretence  and  assurance 
of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  that  such  new  notes  should 
be  used  for  the  renewal  of  said  former  notes,  discounted  as  afore-, 
said ;  yet  said  George  Washington  Doane  having,  under  such 
representations,  obtained  such  new  notes,  indorsed  by  said  Joseph 
Deacon,  did  not  so  apply  or  use  them,  or  either  of  them,  but  trans- 
ferred the  same  to  other  parties,  so  doubling  the  liability  of  said 
Joseph  Deacon,  by  such  fraudulent  misapplication. 


103 

Specification  5th. 
In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  the  month  of  De- 
cember, 1848,  falsely  representing  to  the  said  Joseph  Deacon, 
that  said  Joseph  Deacon  was  responsible  on  two  notes  for  five  hun- 
dred dollars  each,  discounted  at  the  Med  ford  Bank,  for  the  accom- 
modation of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  and  that  the  same 
could  be  renewed  if  the  said  Joseph  Deacon  would  indorse  a  new 
note  for  one  thousand  dollars,  to  be  used  for  that  purpose,  said 
Joseph  Deacon  did  indorse  a  note  for  one  thousand  dollars,  paya- 
ble to  said  Reuben  J.  Germain,  and  by  said  Germain  indorsed, 
and  deliver  the  same  to  said  Germain,  as  the  agent  of  said  George 
Washington  Doane,  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  the  two  notes 
aforesaid,  whereon  he  was  represented  as  being  responsible;  but 
the  said  George  Washington  Doane  did  use  and  apply  said  note 
so  indorsed,  to  discharge  a  certain  note  for  five  hundred  dollars, 
discounted  in  said  Medford  Bank,  for  the  benefit  of  said  George 
Washington  Doane,  but  whereon  said  Joseph  Deacon  was  not  an 
indorser,  and  in  no  manner  responsible,  and  in  substitution  or  re- 
newal of  another  note  in  said  bank,  for  five  hundred  dollars, 
whereon  said  Joseph  Deacon  was  responsible. 

Specification  6th. 

In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  being  indebted  to  one 
William  E.  Page,  in  the  sum  of  five  hundred  dollars,  for  so  much 
money  borrowed  of  him,  and  being  pressed  for  payment,  falsely 
represented  to  the  said  Joseph  Deacon,  that  there  was  a  certain 
note  for  five  hundred  dollars,  whereon  said  Deacon  was  an  indor- 
ser, which  said  George  Washington  Doane  was  desirous  to  renew, 
and  under  such  false  pretext,  procured  and  induced  said  Joseph 
Deacon  to  indorse  a  note  for  the  sum  of  five  hundred  dollars,  for 
the  purpose  of  being  used  in  renewal  of  the  said  alleged  note  for 
a  like  amount ;  and  said  Joseph  Deacon  confiding  in  such  repre- 
sentation, indorsed  and  delivered  a  note  for  that  amount,  to  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  for  such  purpose;  but  in  fact  there 
was  no  note  of  five  hundred  dollars,  whereon  said  Joseph  Deacon 
was  indorser,  for  the  renewal  whereof  such  new  note  was  requi- 
site;  but  said  George  Washington  Doane  transferred  said  note, 
so  indorsed  by  said  Joseph  Deacon,  to  the  said  William  E.  Page, 
as  security  for  the  said  debt  of  five  hundred  dollars,  due  him  by 
said  George  Washington  Doane,  but  for  which  said  Joseph  Dea- 
con was  before  in  no  manner  liable. 

Specification  7th. 
In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  the  latter  part  of 


104 

May,  or  in  the  first  part  of  June,  in  the  year  1848,.  in  New  Jer- 
sey, represented  to  the  said  Joseph  Deacon,  through  the  agents  cf 
said  George  Washington  Doane,.  and  in  his  own  person,  that  he 
was  negotiating  a  loan  of  fifty  thousand  dollars,  to  be  secured 
upon  certain  property  by  mortgage,  which  money  was  for  the 
purpose  of  paying  the  debts  of  said  George  Washington  Doane, 
owing  to  said  Joseph  Deacon,  or  whereon  he  was  liable  for  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  among  others,  and  for  such  purposes, 
requested  the  said  Joseph  Deacon  to  advance  the  sum  of  three 
thousand  dollars  ;  and  the  said  Joseph  Deacon,  confiding  in  such 
false  pretences,  did  sign  and  deliver  to  the  said  George  Washing- 
ton Doane,  five  promissory  notes,  each  for  the  sum  of  six  hun- 
dred dollars,  one  payable  at  ninety  days,  the  other  four  at  the 
expiration  of  each  of  the  next  four  months  successively,  under 
the  express  assurance  of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane, 
that  he  would  not  part  with  the  said  several  notes. 

Yet  said  George  Washington  Doane,  contrary  to  the  intent  of 
the  parties,  and  to  the  assurances  and  pretences  aforesaid,  did  not 
retain  the  said  notes,  but  transferred  them  to  third  parties,  for 
value,  whereby  the  said  Joseph  Deacon  became  liable  to  pay  the 
sum  of  three  thousand  dollars  aforesaid,  to  third  parties,  and  for 
other  purposes  than  those  for  which,  on  the  representations  of  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  the  said  notes  had  been  delivered  to 
him,  thus  creating  an  additional  liability  of  said  Joseph  Deacon 
for  him,  contrary  to  the  intent  of  the  parties;  and  though  the  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  besides  the  proceeds  of  the  said 
notes,  received  divers  other  large  sums  of  money  on  account  of 
said  loan  of  fifty  thousand  dollars,  which  are  specified  in  a  cer- 
tain deed  of  mortgage,  dated  the  10th  day  of  June,  1848,  between 
the  said  George  VVashington  Doane  and  Eliza  G.,  his  wife,  of  the 
one  part,  and  Isaac  B.  Parker,  Thomas  Milnor,  Richard  S.  Field, 
Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaite,  and  Nathan  Thorp,  of  the  other  part, 
and  recorded  in  the  county  of  Burlington,  yet  no  part  either  of 
the  proceeds  of  said  notes  of  said  Joseph  Deacon,  nor  any  other 
portion  of  the  said  money  received  by  said  George  Washington 
Doane,  was  ever  applied  either  in  payment  of  any  part  of  the 
debt  due  by  said  George  Washington  Doane  to  said  Joseph  Dea- 
con, nor  to  discharge  any  of  the  debts  whereon  said  Joseph  Dea- 
con was  liable  for  him,  according  to  the  representations  by  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  of  the  purposes  of  said  loan,  and  the 
property  included  in  said  mortgage  was  utterly  illusory  and  in- 
sufficient as  a  security  for  the  payment  of  the  sums  purporting  to 
be  secured  thereby,  and  in  point  of  fact,  no  part  of  said  three 
throusand  dollars  has  been  repaid  by  said  George  W.  Doane  to 
said  Joseph  Deacon,  nor  has  he  been  secured  for  the  same. 


105 

Specification  8th. 

In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  the  latter  part  of 
May,  or  in  the  first  part  of  June,  1848,  represented  in  person  and 
bv  his  agents,  to  said  Michael  Havs,  in  New  Jersey,  that  the  said 
George  Washington  Doane  was  negotiating  a  loan  of  fifty  thou- 
sand dollars,  which  money  was  to  be  secured  by  mortgage  on 
certain  property,  and  was  to  be  applied  in  payment  of  certain 
debts  of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  due  to  said  Michael 
Hays,  or  whereon  said  Michael  Hays  was  liable  to  third  parties, 
for  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  together  with  other  debts 
of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  which  said  debts  and 
liabilities  it  was  represented  said  sum  of  fifty  thousand  dollars 
would  wholly  or  in  great  part  discharge,  and  for  such  purposes 
requested  the  said  Michael  Hays  to  loan  and  advance  the  sum  of 
three  thousand  dollars;  and  said  Michael  Hays,  confiding  in  such 
false  pretences  of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  did  loan 
and  advance  to  him  the  sum  of  three  thousand  dollars,  for  the 
purposes  aforesaid ;  and  the  said  sum  of  three  thousand  dollars 
was  included  with  other  sums  advanced  to  make  up  said  loan,  in 
a  certain  mortgage  on  certain  property  in  New  Jersey,  dated  the 
10th  day  of  June,  1848,  between  said  George  Washington  Doane 
and  Eliza  G.,  his  wife,  of  the  one  part,  and  Isaac  B.  Parker. 
Thomas  Milnor,  Richard  S.  Field,  Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaite,  and 
Nathan  Thorp,  of  the  second  part,  recorded  in  Burlington  coun- 
ty, but  the  property  to  secure  the  same  was  utterly  illusory  and 
insufficient;  but  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  having  re- 
ceived  the  said  three  thousand  dollars,  as  well  as  other  large  sums 
for  the  purpose  aforesaid,  did  not  apply  the  same,  or  any  part 
thereof  to  the  liquidation  of  the  debt  owing  by  him  to  said  Michael 
Hays,  nor  to  the  discharge  of  any  debt  whereon  the  said  Michael 
Hays  was  responsible  for  said  George  Washington  Doane;  but 
fraudulently  and  in  violation  of  the  purposes  of  the  loan,  and 
the  assurances  and  representations  of  said  George  Washington 
Doane,  on  the  faith  whereof  said  three  thousand  dollars  were  ad- 
vanced, applied  the  same  to  other  purposes,  thereby  increasing 
the  responsibility  of  said  Michael  Hays,  for  said  George  Wash- 
ington Doane,  fraudulently,  to  the  full  amount  of  said  notes. 

Specification  9th: 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  while 
soliciting  a  loan  of  fifty  thousand  dollars,  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
lieving him  of  his  embarrassments,  did,  in  the  months  of  May 
and  June,  in  the  year  1848,  represent  in  person  and  by  his  agents, 
to  divers  persons  who  were  solicited  to   contribute  money  and 


106 

'funds  to  said  loan,  that  the  money  and  funds  so  contributed  would 
be  secured  by  a  mortgage  on  certain  property,  of  sufficient  value 
to  make  the  same  a  safe  investment,  which  representation  was 
made  to  Michael  Hays,  Joseph  Deacon,  Sarah  C.  Robardet,  John 
Black,  John  Irick,  Matthew  McIIenry,  and  Jonathan  J.  Spencer, 
among  others;  but  said  George  Washington  Doane  did  not  se- 
cure the  sums  so  advanced,  on  properly  of  adequate  value,  but 
secured  the  said  loan  only  on  the  property  mentioned  and  con- 
veyed in  and  by  a  certain  mortgage,  dated  10th  June,  1848,  be- 
tween George  Washington  Doane  and  Eliza  G.,  his  wife,  and 
Isaac  B.  Parker,  Thomas  Milnor,  Richard  S.  Field,  Jeremiah  C. 
Garthwaite,  and  Nathan  Thorp,  now  of  record  in  Burlington 
county,  which  said  property  was  then  subject  to  heavy  liabilities 
and  liens,  and  well  known  by  said  George  Washington  Doane,  at 
the  time  of  such  representations,  lo  be  utterly  inadequate  to  secure 
the  sums  so  borrowed  on  the  faith  thereof. 

Specification   10th. 

In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid, 
in  the  month  of  October,  in  the  year  1848,  being,  as  he  well  knew, 
utterly  insolvent,  and  knowing  that  one  Alfred  Stubbs,  a  Presby- 
ter of  the  Diocese  of  New  Jersey,  held  the  sum  of  one  thousand 
dollars,  belonging  to  the  Society  for  the  Promotion  of  Christian 
Knowledge  and  Piety,  an  association  of  members  of  the  Protes- 
tant Episcopal  Church,  in  the  said  Diocese,  which  sum  it  was  the 
duty  of  said  Alfred  Stubbs  to  loan  out  or  invest  on  good  security,  at 
legal  interest,  did  borrow  the  said  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars, 
from  the  said  Alfred  Stubbs,  under  the  promise  and  condition  that 
he  would  give  said  Alfred  Stubbs  satisfactory  security,  without 
delay  ;  but  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  having  obtained 
possession  of  said  sum  of  money,  did  not  give  the  said  Alfred  Stubbs 
satisfactory  security  therefor,  but  gave  him  no  other  security  than 
the  bond  of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  with  a  power  of 
attorney  to  enter  judgment  on  said  bond,  payable  in  thirty  days, 
which  instrument  was  no  security  till  the  expiration  of  thirty  days, 
and  was  not  satisfactory  to  said  Alfred  Stubbs,  and  was  not  such 
security  that  a  person  holding  trust  funds  would  be  justified  in 
loaning  such  funds  on  the  faith  of  it,  nor  was  it  such  securitv  as 
was  contemplated  at  the  time  of  the  loan  of  said  money,  and  it. 
did  not  in  fact  secure  the  payment  of  said  one  thousand  dollars, 
but  by  the  failure  and  legal  insolvency  of  said  George  Washing- 
ton Doane,  the  said  Alfred  Stubbs  was  left  without  any  legal  re- 
medy to  secure  said  debt,  which  conduct  of  said  George  Wash- 
ington Doane  was  a  knowing  concurrence  on  his  part  in  a  mis- 
application of  trust  funds,  in  a  breach  of  trust  relative  thereto, 


107 

and  immoral;  and  was  specially  criminal  in  a  Bishop,  whose  duty 
it  was  to  care  anxiously  for  the  safety  of  funds  charitably  con- 
tributed for  the  promotion  of  Christian  knowledge  and  piety. 

Specification  11th. 
In  this,  ^ 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  at  various  times  du- 
ring the  years  1846  and  1847  and  1848,  during  all  which  time  he 
was  insolvent  and  utterly  unable  to  pay  his  debts,  and  knowing 
that  one  Reuben  J.  Germain  held,  as  Treasurer  of  the  Conven- 
tion of  the  Diocese  of  New  Jersey,  money  and  stocks  and  valua- 
ble securities,  to  the  amount  of  seven  thousand  dollars  and  up- 
wards, which  funds  it  was  the  duty  of  said  Reuben  J.  Germain 
to  keep  invested  on  good  security,  did  procure  the  said  Reuben  J. 
Germain  to  loan  to  him,  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  out 
of  the  said  funds  so  belonging  to  the  said  Convention,  divers  sums 
of  money,  at  various  times  during  the  years  aforesaid,  amount- 
ing in  the  aggregate  to  the  sum  of  seven  thousand  dollars  and 
upwards,  upon  the  security  of  the  notes  of  the  said  George  Wash- 
ington Doane  solely,  contrary  to  the  duty  of  the  said  Reuben  J. 
Germain,  as  treasurer  of  said  Convention,  and  without  the  knowl- 
edge of  said  Convention,  that  said  sum  of  money  had  been  loan- 
ed to  the  said  George  Wasington  Doane,  without  other  security 
than  his  notes,  the  said  notes  of  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane  not  being  any  safe  or  adequate  security  for  said  money, 
at  the  times  they  were  respectively  given;  and  the  said  money 
so  borrowed  remained  so  without  other  security  till  the  failure  of 
said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  March,  1849,  whereby  the 
same  was  wholly  lost  to  the  said  Convention,  which  conduct  of 
the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  involved  the  guilt  of  parti- 
cipating in  a  breach  of  trust,  the  guilt  of  inducing  an  officer  of 
the  Convention  to  violate  the  trust  of  his  office,  and  the  guilt  of 
jeoparding  the  property  of  the  Convention  without  its  knowledge, 
and  without  obtaining  its  sanction,  said  George  Washington  Doane 
never  having  caused  the  said  Convention  to  be  informed  that  said 
money  was  held  by  him  unsecured,  save  by  his  own  notes,  and 
the  guilt  of  endangering,  by  appropriating  them  to  his  own  use, 
the  safety  of  funds  consecrated  to  the  service  of  the  Church  of 
God. 

Specification   12th. 
In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having 
been,  in  November,  1840,  appointed  guardian  of  George  D. 
Winslow,  by  the  Orphans'  Court  of  Burlington  county,  in  New 
Jersey,  and  having  given  bond  for  the  performance  of  the  duties 
of  his  said  office,  with  Mrs.  A.  C.  Winslow,  as  security  in  said 


108 

bond,  and  having  received  property  of  the  said  infant,  to  a  large 
amount,  to  wit,  to  the  value  of  one  thousand  dollars,  did,  in  viola- 
tion of  his  duty  and  trust  as  guardian  aforesaid,  misapply  said 
property,  by  appropriating  the  same  to  his  own  use,  without  giv- 
ing valid  security  for  the  same,  thereby  subjecting  the  said  A.  C. 
Winslow  to  liability  to  pay  said  money  to  his  ward,  and  jeopard- 
ing his  ward's  property,  which  money  said  George  Washington 
Doane  has  not  repaid. 

Specification   13th. 
In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  being, 
on  or  about  the  5th  day  of  June,  1850,  in  New  Jersey,  indebted 
to  the  Camden  Bank,  upon  a  certain  promissory  note  for  the  sum 
of  one  hundred  dollars,  whereon  Michael  Havs  was  an  indorser, 
when  said  note  approached  maturity,  being  unable  to  meet  said 
liability,  induced  the  Cashier  of  said  Camden  Bank  not  to  protest 
said  note  so  as  to  fix  the  indorser,  by  the  false  assurance  and  pre- 
tense, that  he,  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  would,  soon 
after  his  return  home,  send  to  said  Cashier,  the  money  to  pay  said 
note,  or  a  new  note  for  the  same,  with  the  said  Michael  Hays  as 
an  indorser;  and  said  Cashier,  having  confided  in  such  promises, 
and  neglected  to  protest  said  note,  so  that  the  said  indorser  was 
discharged,  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  did  not  send  the 
money  requisite  to  pay  said  note,  to  the  Cashier,  nor  to  the  said 
Bank,  nor  did  he  deliver  to  said  Cashier  nor  to  said  Bank,  an- 
other note  for  the  said  debt,  with  the  indorsement  of  said  Mi- 
chael Hays,  or  any  other  person,  whereby  said  Camden  Bank 
was  defrauded  out  of  the  security  of  said  Michael  Hay's  indorse- 
ment, and  out  of  said  debt. 

Specification  14th. 
In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  repeated- 
ly and  at  various  times  during  the  years  1847  and  1848  and  1849, 
drew  a  great  number  of  checks  and  drafts  or  orders  for  divers 
large  sums  of  money,  on  the  Mechanics'  Bank,  of  Burlington, 
and  on  the  Bank  of  North  America,  in  Philadelphia,  on  the  Mor- 
ris County  Bank,  in  New  Jersey,  on  the  Bank  of  Princeton  and 
on  other  Banks,  and  delivered  the  said  checks,  drafts  or  orders 
to  divers  persons  to  whom  he  was  indebted,  in  payment  of  the 
moneys  so  owing  by  said  George  Washington  Doane  to  them,  the 
said  George  Washington  Doane  not  having,  at  the  time  when  said 
checks,  drafts  or  orders  were  drawn,  nor  when  they  were  respec- 
tively payable,  funds  to  meet  and  satisfy  them  respectively,  in 
the  several  Banks  whereon  said  checks,  drafts  or  orders  wrere 
drawn,  and  said  George  Washington  Doane,  having  at  the  time 


109 

of  drawing  said  checks,  drafts  or  orders,  no  right  or  authority  to 
draw  them  on  those  Banks  respectively,  and  having  no  reasonable 
expectation  of  having  funds  in  said  Banks,  to  meet  said  checks, 
drafts  or  orders,  when  presentable,  which  conduct  was  fraudulent 
■and  immoral. 

That  in  the  year  1848  or  1849,  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane  drew  a  check  on  the  Mechanics'  Bank  of  Burlington,  for 
the  sum  of  two  thousand  two  hundred  dollars,  and  delivered  the 
same  to  the  Princeton  Bank,  in  payment  of  a  debt  due  by  him  to 
said  Princeton  Bank,  when  the  said  George  Washington  Doane 
had  no  money  in  the  said  Mechanics'  Bank  of  Burlington,  to 
meet  said  check  when  the  same  was  payable,  nor  when  the  same 
was  presented  for  payment. 

That  on  or  about  the  month  of  Julv,  1S48,  the  said  George 
Washington  Doane  borrowed  of  one  William  B.  Price,  the  sum 
of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars,  and  delivered  to  the  said  Price, 
a  check  on  the  Mechanics'  Bank  of  Burlington,  for  the  said 
money,  payable  in  a  week  or  thereabouts;  but  the  said  George 
Washington  Doane  did  not  provide  funds  in  said  Bank  to  meet 
•said  check,  when  the  same  was  payable,  and  the  same,  when  pre- 
sented, was  not  in  fact,  paid. 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  drew  and  delivered 
to  Joseph  Deacon,  the  checks  following,  on  the  respective  days 
whereon  they  bear  date,  on  the  Mechanics'  B  ink  of  Burlington, 
that  is  to  say,  a  check  dated  12th  November,  1848,  on  the  said 
Bank,  payable  to  J.  Deacon,  or  bearer,  for  fifty  dollars  ;  a  check 
dated  17th  November,  184S,  on  said  Bank,  payable  to  Joseph 
Deacon,  or  bearer,  for  fifty  dollars  ;  a  check  dated  25th  Novem- 
ber, 1848,  on  said  Bank,  payable  to  Joseph  Deacon,  or  bearer, 
for  fifty  dollars;  a  check  dated  15th  January,  1849,  on  said  Bank, 
payable  to  cash,  or  bearer,  for  twenty-five  dollars ;  a  check  dated 
20th  January,  1849,  on  said  Bank,  payable  to  cash,  or  bearer,  for 
twenty-five  dollars  ;  a  check  dated  20th  February,  1849,  on  said 
Bank,  payable  to  cash,  or  bearer,  for  eighteen  dollars  and  seven- 
ty-five cents;  and  ihe  said  George  Washington  Doane  also  drew 
and  delivered,  or  caused  to  be  delivered  to  Gideon  Humphreys,  a 
check  on  the  Mechanics'  Bank  at  Burlington,  payable  to  bearer, 
for  the  sum  of  one  hundred  and  fourteen  dollars,  and  dated  on 
the  10th  November,  1848;  and  said  George  Washington  Doane 
had  not,  at  the  several  times  when  said  checks  were  respectively 
drawn,  nor  when  the  same  were  payable,  any  funds  in  the  Me- 
chanics' Bank  of  Burlington,  to  meet  the  same,  and  said  checks 
were  not  in  fact  paid,  when  presented  at  said  Bank,  and  are  still 
unpaid. 

All  which  conduct  on  the  part  of  said  George  Washington 
Doane,  was  fraudulent  and  immoral,  and  scandalous  in  a  Chris- 
tian Bishop. 


110 

Specification  15th. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  about 
the  month  of  March,  1847,  and  when  he  was  utterly  insolvent, 
induced  and  prevailed  on  one  Sarah  C.  Robardet,  in  Burlington, 
to  loan  him  three  thousand  dollars,  upon  the  false  representation 
and  assurance  that  he  would  give  her  a  mortgage  on  certain  pro- 
perty worth  six  thousand  dollars,  for  the  securing  of  the  repay- 
ment of  the  money,  and  she,  confiding  in  such  representation, 
loaned  the  said  three  thousand  dollars  to  the  said  George  Wash- 
ington Doane,  who  thereupon,  on  the  11th  day  of  March,  1847, 
executed  a  mortgage  on  a  certain  parcel  of  land,  to  said  Sarah 
C.  Robardet,  which  w?as  not  worth  the  sum  of  six  thousand  dol- 
lars, but  on  the  contrary,  said  land  being  scarcely  worth  six  thou- 
sand dollars  in  fee  free  from  incumbrances,  was  already  subject 
to  a  prior  lien  or  mortgage  for  twenty-five  hundred  dollars,  of 
which  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  was  well  informed 
when  he  solicited  and  obtained  said  loan,  but  which  he  did  not 
disclose  to  said  Sarah  C.  Robardet,  and  by  such  concealment  he 
obtained  said  loan,  which  could  not  have  been  obtained  but  for 
such  concealment;  and  the  said  land,  subject  to  such  prior  lien, 
was  not  an  adequate  security  for  the  three  thousand  dollars  ad- 
vanced thereon,  to  said  George  Washington  Doane,  according  to 
the  usages  of  business  men;  in  all  which  the  said  George  Wash- 
ington Doane  imposed  on  and  deceived  the  said  Sarah  C.  Robar- 
det, by  inducing  her  to  believe  she  would  have  a  security  to  the 
extent  of  six  thousand  dollars,  for  the  three  thousand  loaned  as 
aforesaid,  and  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  order  to  pro- 
cure said  loan,  u«;ed  undue  importunity  and  solicitation,  to  which 
his  character  as  Bishop  gave  preponderating  weight. 

Specification   IGtii. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  in  the 
vear  1848,  upon  the  representation  to  one  Herman  Hooker,  in 
Philadelphia,  a  bookseller,  that  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane  had  raised  money  by  a  collection,  for  the  purchase  of  a 
parish  library,  or  other  similar  object,  obtained  from  said  Herman 
Hooker,  on  the  faith  of  such  collection,  books  to  the  value  of 
about  seventy  dollars,  and  having  obtained  said  books,  failed  or 
refused  to  pay  for  them,  and  they  were  not  paid  for,  at  the  date 
of  his  insolvent  assignment;  all  which  conduct  was  immoral  and 
dishonest,  since  said  George  Washington  Doane  either  falsely  re- 
presented that  he  had  collected  the  money  for  such  purpose,  or 
having  collected  it,  he  misapplied  it  to  other  purposes,  in  violation 
of  the  trust  confided  to  him. 


in 

Specification   17th. 
In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  did  after 
he  had  become,  and  while  he  continued  utterly  insolvent  and  un- 
able to  pay  the  debts  already  owing  by  him,  to  wit,  during  the 
years  1847,  1848  and  1849,  borrow  large  sums  of  money  and 
contract  heavy  and  numerous  additional  debts  to  divers  persons, 
amounting  in  the  aggregate  to  a  sum  exceeding  seventy-nine 
thousand  dollars :  that  is  to  say,  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane,.  in  the  month  of  March,  1847,  borrowed  of  Sarah  C.  Ro- 
bardet,  the  sum  of  three  thousand  dollars. 

The  said  George  Washington  Doane  incurred  a  debt  of  about 
two  thousand  dollars  to  one  Thomas  Dutton,  for  groceries  and 
other  goods,,  wares  and  merchandise,  during  the  years  1847,  1.848 
and  1849. 

The  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  or  about  the  month  of 
June,.  1848,  borrowed  from  the  following  persons  the  several  sums 
respectively  following  their  names:  from  Lawson  Carter,  the  sum 
of  five  thousand  dollars  ;  from  Joseph  Deacon,  the  sum   of  three 
thousand  dollars;  from  Michael  Hays,  the  sum  of  three  thousand 
dollars;  from  Isaac  B.  Parker,  the  sum  of  two  thousand  dollars; 
from   Thomas   B.  Woolman,  the   sum   of  two   thousand   dollars  ; 
from    William  Wright,  the   sum  of  two   thousand   dollars;  from 
Nathan  Thorp,  the  sum  of  one   thousand  and  five  hundred  dol- 
lars; from   Thomas   Dugdale,  the   sum  of  one  thousand  dollars; 
from  Franklin  Woolman,  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars;  from 
Taylor  &  Dugdale,  one   thousand  dollars  ;  from  Thomas  Dutton, 
one  thousand  dollars;  from  Sarah  C.Robardet,  one  thousand  dol- 
lars ;  from  William  H.  Carse,  one  thousand  dollars  ;.  from  Abra- 
ham Brown,  one  thousand   dollars;  from   Charles  Bispham,  one 
thousand  dollars;  from  Elias  D.  B.  Ogden,  one  thousand  dollars; 
from  John  J.  Chetwood,  one  thousand  dollars;  from  Joel  W.  Gon- 
dii", one  thousand  dollars;  from  Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaitc,  one  thou- 
sand dollars;  from  Samuel  Meeker,  one  thousand  dollars;  from 
Christiana  Lippincott,  one  thousand  dollars;  from  George  P.  Mc- 
Culloch,  three  hundred  and   fifty  dollars  ;  from   Edmund   Morris, 
five  hundred  dollars;  from  Thomas  Milnor,  five  hundred  dollars; 
from    George   Gaskill,  five   hundred  dollars;    from   Edward   B. 
Grubb,  one  thousand  dollars  ;  from  Samuel  Rodgers,  five  hundred 
dollars;  from   William   A.  Rodgers,  five  hundred  dollars;  from 
W.  J.  Hall,  five  hundred  dollars;  from  Isaac  Alfred  Shreve,  five 
hundred  dollars  ;  from  David  Harmer,  five  hundred  dollars  ;  from 
William  Mcllvaine,  five  hundred   dollars;  from  Albert  Havens, 
five  hundred  dollars;  from  Edward  Harris,  five  hundred  dollars: 
from  John  Dobbins,  five  hundred  dollars;  from  John  Black,  five 
hundred  dollars;  from  John  lrick,  five  hundred  dollars;  from  Hi- 


112 

ram  Hutchinson,  five  hundred  dollars;  from  Ralph  Marsh,  five 
hundred  dollars;  from  James  M.  Quimby,  five  hundred  dollars; 
from  William  J.  Watson,  five  hundred  dollars;  from  David  Bab- 
bitt, one  thousand  dollars  ;  from  James  A.  Williams,  one  thousand 
dollars;  from  Alfred  A.  Sloan,  three  hundred  dollars;  from  John 
G.  Clark,  three  hundred  dollars  ;  from  Henry  A.  Ford,  three  hun- 
dred dollars;  from  George  P.Mitchell,  three  hundred  dollars; 
from  Thomas  Hopkins  &l  Son,  three  hundred  dollars;  from  Wil- 
liam C.  Myers,  three  hundred  dollars  ;  from  Jonathan  J.  Spencer, 
two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars;  from  Frederick  L.  Churchard, 
two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars;  from  Jacob  Mitchell,  two  hundred 
dollars;  from  Daniel  Bennett,  two  hundred  dollars;  from  Barak 
T.  Nichols,  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars;  from  William  S.  Fait- 
oute,  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars;  from  Charles  H.  Fenimore, 
three  hundred  and  fifty  dollars;  from  William  Stone,  three  hun- 
dred dollars;  from  Francis  Roth,  three  hundred  dollars,  included 
in  the  mortgage  executed  on  the  10th  day  of  June,  1848,  between 
George  Washington  Doane  and  Eliza  G.  his  wife,  and  Isaac  B. 
Parker,  Thomas  Milnor,  Richard  S.  Field,  Jeremiah  C.  Garth- 
waite  and  Nathan  Thorp,  but  which  mortgage  was  grossly  insuf- 
ficient as  security  for  the  same. 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  July,  1848,  bor- 
rowed the  sum  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  from  William  B. 
Price. 

That  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  the  month  of  Octo- 
ber, 1848,  borrowed  from  Alfred  Stubbs  the  sum  of  one  thousand 
dollars. 

That  said  George  Washington  Doane,  borrowed  in  or  about 
November,  1848,  from  William  E.  Page,  the  sum  of  five  hundred 
dollars. 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  the  years  1848 
and  1849,  incurred  a  debt  to  Michael  Hays,  of  ten  thousand  dol- 
lars, by  the  use  of  notes  indorsed  for  the  accommodation  of  said 
George  Washington  Doane  by  said  Michael  Hays  within  that 
period,  beside  the  three  thousand  dollars  specified  in  the  mortgage. 
That  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  the  years  1848  and 
1849,  incurred  a  debt  to  Joseph  Deacon,  of  eleven  thousand  and 
five  hundred  dollars  and  upwards,  by  the  using  of  notes  indorsed 
by  said  Joseph  Deacon  for  the  accommodation  of  said  George 
Washington  Doane,  and  by  him  discounted  or  transferred  to  third 
parties  during  that  period,  in  addition  to  the  three  thousand  dol- 
lars in  said  mortgage  mentioned^ 

That  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  1848  and  1849,  and 
prior  to  March  26,  of  the  latter  year,  borrowed  of  William  H. 
Carse,  five  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  -J^,  and  by  his  aid,  from 
another  person,  the  sum  of  five  hundred  and  ninety  dollars. 


113 

That  in  the  years  1847, 1848  and  1849,  the  said  George  Wash- 
ington Doane  incurred  a  debt  to  George  Zantzinger,  in  Philadel- 
phia, of  twelve  hundred  dollars,  for  wines  and  spirituous  liquors. 

And  at  the  time  of  the  contracting  of  said  several  debts,  said 
George  Washington  Doane,  well  knowing  his  insolvent  condition, 
did  not  disclose  his  insolvent  condition  to  the  said  several  persons 
to  whom  he  incurred  the  said  several  responsibilities. 

Nor  did  he  disclose  to  them  or  any  of  them  the  amount  of  his 
debts  and  liabilities,  nor  the  entire  insufficiency  of  his  means  to 
meet  the  same;  but  on  the  contrary  he  dealt,  with  said  several 
persons  as  if  able  to  meet  the  engagements  and  perform  the  obli- 
gations he  was  contracting  with  them.  And  to  several  of  them, 
to  wit,  to  the  said  William  H.  Carse,  William  E.  Page,  William 
B.  Price  and  Thomas  Dutton,  he  gave  assurances  of  his  ability 
to  repay  them.  And  when  obtaining  the  indorsements  aforesaid 
of  said  Michael  Hays  and  Joseph  Deacon,  he  left  them  under  the 
impression  that  his  affairs  were  prosperous,  and  at  various  times 
quieted  their  apprehensions  by  assurances  that  they  respectively 
should  lose  nothing  bv  such  indorsements. 

The  incurring  of  which  liabilities  while  insolvent,  was  dishon- 
est and  unjust,  as  well  to  the  former  creditors  of  said  George 
Washington  Doane,  as  to  those  with  whom  such  new  liabilities 
were  contracted  ;  and  the  immorality  thereof  was  greatly  agora- 
vated  bv  his  failure  to  disclose  his  insolvent  condition  to  them, 
and  by  the  positive  deception  practised  by  his  false  promises  and 
representations  aforesaid. 

All  which  is  unjust,  immoral,  and  unbecoming  a  Christian  Bish- 
op, and  tending  to  bring  into  contempt  the  solemn  office  of  Bishop. 

Specification   18th. 
In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having 
on  the  20th  day  of  August,  1849,  negotiated  an  agreement  be- 
tween Eliza  G.  Doane  his  wife,  and  Michael  Hays,  sanctioned 
by  the  consent  in  writing  of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane, 
whereby  it  was  stipulated  that  the  said  Eliza  G.  Doane  should 
transfer  to  said  Michael  Havs  all  her  right,  title  and  interest  in 
one  thousand  dollars,  with  certain  interest  in  said  agreement  men- 
tioned, the  same  being  part  of  the  income  to  which  she  was  enti- 
tled under  the  will  of  her  former  husband,  James  Perkins,  on  the 
10th  day  of  January,  1850,  and  on  every  succeeding  10th  day  of 
January,  till  half  of  the  sum  should  have  been  repaid  said  Mi- 
chael Hays,  which  he  should  be  required  to  pay  under  the  terms 
of  an  arrangement  indicated  in  that  agreement  for  procuring  the 
discontinuance  of  certain  suits  then  pending  against  said  Hays 
on   notes   indorsed   bv  him   for   the  accommodation   of  the  said 

II 


114 

George  Washington  Doane,  without  a  contestation  of  said  suits 
together  with  interest  on  the  sum  so  to  be  paid,  and  the  costs 
incident  to  procuring  such  discontinuances;  and  immediately 
on  the  effecting  of  such  settlement,  that  said  Eliza  G.  Doane 
should  give  Michael  Hays  a  power  of  attorney  to  receive  the  sum 
of  one  thousand  dollars  from  the  executors  of  James  Perkins  at 
the  times  above  specified— to  which  agreement,  signed  by  said 
Eliza  G.  Doane,  was  appended  the  written  assent  of  said  George 
Washington  Doane  ;  and  said  Michael  Hays  having  effected  the 
settlement  contemplated  in  that  agreement,,  and  having  abandoned 
all  defense  of  the  suits  on  said  indorsements  against  him,  the  said 
Eliza  G.  Doane  executed  a  power  of  attorney  to  said  Michael 
Hays  on  the  30th  day  of  October,  1849,  reciting  the  agreement, 
and  authorizing  him  to  receive  from  the  executors  of  said  James 
Perkins,  her  late  husband,  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  part 
of  her  yearly  income,  on  the  10th  day  of  January,  1 85 J ,  and 
every  succeeding  10th  day  of  January,  till  said  Michael  Hays 
shall  have  received  the  sum  of  ten  thousand  four  hundred  and 
nine  dollars,  with  interest  at  six  per  cent,  on  the  balances  remain- 
ing after  every  payment  of  one  thousand  dollars  ;  which  power 
of  attorney  said  George  Washington  Doane  having  caused  to  be 
delivered  to  said  Michael  Hays,  in  performance  of  the  agreement 
aforesaid,  he  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  persuaded  and 
induced  said  Michael  Hays  not  to  present  said  power  of  attorney 
to  the  executors,  and  not  to  demand  the  money  thereby  ordered 
to  be  paid  on  the  10th  day  of  January,  under  the  pretense  and 
assurance  that  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  would  pay  to 
said  Michael  Hays  the  said  instalment  ;  but  though  said  Michael 
Havs  did  not  demand  said  monev    from   the  executors,  yet  when 

*■'  w  ft* 

in  January,  1851,  after  the  day  of  payment,  he  called  on  said 
George  Washington  Doane  for  the  same,  he  asked  further  indul- 
gence till  May,  1&51,  when  he  promised  to  pay  the  same;  and  said 
Michael  Havs  having  waited  till  said  month  of  May,  then  called 
on  said  George  Washington  Doane,  who  again  failed  and  refused 
to  pay  the  said  money;  and  upon  saio1  Michael  Hays  threatening 
to  apply  to  the  church  or  to  the  law  for  redress,  said  George 
Washington  Doane  threatened  that  he  would  put  himself  on  his 
defense,  in  which  event  the  said  Michael  Hays  would  get  nothing. 
And  said  Michael  Hays  thereupon  afterwards,  to  wit,  on  or 
about  the  1st  day  of  October,  1851,  en  used  the  said  power  of  at- 
torney to  be  presented  to  the  executors  aforesaid,  and  the  money 
thereon  demanded;  but  the  executors  refused  to  pay  the  same  or 
any  part  thereof,  the  said  fund  whereon  the  said  power  of  attor- 
ney was  drawn,  being  an  annuity  of  six  thousand  dollars  given 
by  the  will  of  said  James  Perkins  to  his  widow,  said  Eliza  G.. 
payable  quarterly,  which  fell  on  the  months  of  January,  April, 


115 

July  and  October  in  each  year;  all  which  instalments  had  been 
drawn  at  the  time  of  the  presentation  of  said  order  or  power  of 
attorney,  to  1st  October,  1851 ;  and  no  provision  having  been 
made  either  by  said  George  Washington  Doane,  or  Eliza  G.,  his 
wife,  to  meet  said  payment;  but  on  the  contrary,  the  said  George 
Washington  Doane  had  procured  from  said  Eliza  G.,  an  order 
dated  1st  October,  1851,  on  said  executors,  for  fifteen  hundred  dol- 
lars, the  annuity  due  on  that  day,  and  had  transferred  said  order 
to  one  E.  N.  Perkins,  by  whom  it  was  claimed  in  opposition  to 
said  Michael  Hays;  and  the  said  executors  have  refused  and  de- 
clined to  pay  said  instalment  to  said  Michael  Hays,  because  the 
agreement  is  invalid  and  the  consideration  usurious.  By  all 
which  proceedings  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  having 
induced  said  Michael  Hays  to  abandon  the  defense  of  said  suits 
on  said  indorsements,  and  so  deprived  him  of  the  chance  of  de- 
feating the  laws  on  the  ground  of  usury  or  fraud,  has  now  de- 
frauded said  Hays  out  of  said  instalment  for  January,  1851,  in 
said  power  of  attorney  mentioned. 

Specification   19th. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having 
on  or  about  the  30th  day  of  April,  in  the  year  1845,  presented  to 
and  laid  before  Horace  Binney  a  certain  subscription  paper,  for 
the  building  of  a  Church  at  Burlington,  New  Jersey,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  procuring  the  subscription  of  the  name  of  said  Horace 
Binney  thereto,  for  the  payment  of  money  towards  that  object, 
and  said  Horace  Binney  having  then  and  there  refused  to  sub- 
scribe his  name  thereto,  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  did, 
out  of  the  presence  of  said  Horace  Binney,  and  without  the  au- 
thority and  against  the  consent  of  said  Horace  Binney,  sign  the 
name  of  said  Horace  Binney  to  the  said  paper  as  a  subscriber  of 
one  thousand  dollars  to  the  building  of  said  church — which  act 
was  immoral  and  criminal,  and  a  fraud  on  said  Horace  Binnev. 

Specification  20th. 

In  this. 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having 
procured  and  induced  sundry  persons  who  held  certificates  of 
stock  in  St.  Mary's  Hall,  to  sign  their  names  to  the  subscription 
paper  for  the  building  of  a  Church  in  Burlington  in  New  Jersev 
in  the  said  19lb  specification  mentioned,  as  subscribers  uf  sums 
of  money  equal  to  the  stock  held  by  them  respectively  in  St. 
Mary's  Hall,  upon  the  condition  and  assurance  that  said  certifi- 
cate 9  should  be  received  as  cash  by  him  from  them,  and  that  said 
George  Washington  Doane  would  himself  pay  the   amounts  so 


116 

subscribed  by  them,  and  having  in  this  mode  and  on  those  terms 
procured  the  names  of  Mrs.  Garret  U.  Wall  and  Mrs.  Susan  V. 
Bradford,  and  William  Mcllvaine  and  others  to  the  said  subscrip- 
tion paper  for  the  sum  of  six  thousand  dollars,  the  said  George 
Washington  Doane  afterwards  presented  said  paper  with  those 
said  names  procured  under  the  condition  and  circumstances  afore- 
said thereupon,  as  promising  to  pay  money  to  the  said  amount, 
and  also  with  the  name  of  Horace  Binney  thereon,  as  a  subscri- 
ber of  one  thousand  dollars  placed  there  in  the  manner  mentioned 
in  said  foregoing  specification  to  divers  other  persons,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  obtaining  the  names  of  such  other  persons  as  subscribers 
of  money  on  said  paper  toward  building  said  Church,  and  did  so 
procure  additional  subscriptions  to  the  amount  of  at  least  six 
thousand  dollars  additional. 

And  in  presenting  said  paper  for  said  last  mentioned  subscrip- 
tions, said  George  Washington   Doane   did   fraudulently  not  (lis- 

CD  O  * 

close  the  circumstances  under  which  the  name  of  said  Horace 
Binney  was  placed  on  said  paper,  nor  that  the  said  Mrs.  Garret 
D.  Wall,  and  Mrs.  Susan  V.  Bradford,  and  William  Mcllvaine, 
and  others  who  had  subscribed  their  stock  in  St.  Mary's  Hall, 
were  not  in  truth  subscribers  of  the  money  which  the  paper  re- 
presented them  as  subscribing;  and  the  obtaining  of  signatures 
to  said  paper  without  such  disclosures,  was  obtaining  money  un- 
der false  representations,  and  a  fraud  on  such  subsequent  subscri- 
bers— said  certificates  of  stock  in  St.  Marv's  Hall,  being  then  of 
much  less  value  than  the  sums  of  money  they  professed  to  re- 
present. 

And  said  George  Washington  Doane  having  procured  the 
names  of  said  owners  of  certificates  of  stock  in  St.  Marv's  Hall 
to  said  subscription  paper,  as  contributors  of  so  much  money 
upon  the  condition  and  assurance  that  said  certificates  should  be 
received  as  cash  from  them,  and  that  he  would  pay  the  money 
subscribed,  vet  did,  on  the  28th  day  of  May,  1847,  in  New  .)cv- 
sey,  in  a  letter  to  Thomas  Milnor,  write  to  the  eftect  following, 
"  Let  me  here  say,  that  in  procuring  a  subscription  of  more  than 
Si 3,000,  no  man  or  woman  put  in  a  single  word  of  condition,  or 
the  slightest  claim  for  equivalent,  unless  Mr.  Binney  so  makes  out 
his  case" — which  statement  was  false  as  to  those  persons  who 
subscribed  on  condition  of  paying  in  certificates  of  stock  in  St. 
Mary's  Hall. 

Specification  2  1st. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having 
engaged  Munsig  &  Bowman  through  William  Munsig,  a  partner 
of  that  firm,  on  or  about   the   1st   day  of  May,  1847,  to   furnish 


117 

work,  labor  and  materials  for  the  introduction  and  establishment 
of  Gas  fixtures  at  Burlington  College,  and  at  St.  Mary's  Hall, 
and  at  the  residence  of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  at  Riv- 
erside, at  Burlington,  New  Jersey,  upon  the  promise  to  pay  them 
one  thousand  dollars  in  November,  1847,  and  for  the  materi- 
als and  labor  employed  in  performing  said  work,  at  rates  stipu- 
lated in  said  contract;  and  for  the  balance  due  at  the  completion 
of  said  work,  to  give  them  approved  paper  for  such  balance,  pay- 
able at  one  year  with  interest;  and  the  said  Munsig  &  Bowman 
having  on  or  about  the  23d  day  of  May,  1847,  completed  said 
work  at  an  expense  of  upwards  of  four  thousand  dollars,  whereof 
two  thousand  one  hundred  and  sixty-two  dollars  and  thirteen  cents 
remained  unpaid,  applied  to  said  George  Washington  Doane  to 
give  them  the  approved  paper,  or  notes  at  one  year  with  interest 
stipulated  for  and  promised  by  him  to  them  as  aforesaid  ;  but  said 
George  Washington  Doane  refused  to  comply  with  said  promise, 
and  compelled  said  Munsig  &  Bowman  to  take  the  six  promis- 
sory notes  of  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  for  the  sums 
and  times  following,  without  interest,  viz.,  a  note  for  ihree  hun- 
dred and  sixty-five  dollars,  payable  to  William  Munsig  at  five 
months,  and  dated  8th  December,  1848 ;  and  a  note  dated  22d 
February,  1848,  payable  to  Munsig  &  Bowman,  at  nine  months. 
for  three  hundred  and  fortv-seven  dollars  and  thirteen  cents  ;  and 
a  note  dated  24th  February,  1848,  al  nine  months,  for  two  hun- 
dred dollars;  and  a  note  dated  25th  of  February,  1848,  at  nine 
months*for  four  hundred  dollars;  and  two  notes  dated  22d  Feb- 
ruary, 1848,  at  twelve  months,  one  for  four  hundred  dollars,  and 
the  other  for  four  hundred  and  fifty  dollars — neither  of  said  notes 
having  any  indorser  or  other  security,  and  none  of  them  bearing- 
interest:  and  none  of  said  notes  were  paid  when  they  respec- 
tively fell  due,  and  all  are  still  unpaid :  by  which  false  promises, 
said  Munsig  &  Bowman  were  defrauded  of  the  security  due  them 
as  under  said  contract,  and  of  the  money  which  ought  to  have 
been  secured  therebv. 

All  which  conduct  of  said  George  Washington  Doane  was; 
dishonest  and  unbecoming  a  Christian  Bishop. 

Specification  22d. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having 
given  security  to  Mrs.  C.  Lippincott,  for  a  large  sum  of  money, 
loaned  by  her  to  him,  did,  in  the  year  1847,  in  New  Jersey,  pro- 
cure from  her,  and  induce  her  to  deliver  to  him,  the  said  security, 
upon  his  promise  to  return  the  same  to  her ;  and  she,  confiding  in 
such  promise,  and  in  his  character  as  a  Christian  Bishop,  having 
so  delivered  such  security,  he  wholly  neglected  to  restore  the 


118 

same,  or  any  substitute  equivalent  thereto,  but  used  the  property 
covered  by  said  security  to  secure  some  other  creditor  or  credi- 
tors. 

Specification  23d. 
In  this, 

That  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid, 
did,  at  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of  New  Jersey,  in  May, 
1849,  endeavor  to  intimidate  the  Rev.  Henry  B.  Sherman,  a  Pres- 
byter' of  the  Convention,  and  deter  him  from  causing  an  inquiry 
to  be  made  by  the  said  Convention,  as  to  the  condition  and  in- 
vestment of  the  Episcopal  fund  belonging  to  the  Convention,  and 
then  held  by  said  George  Washington  Doane,  on  the  sole  security 
of  his  own  notes,  without  the  knowledge  of  the  Convention.  All 
which  was  in  violation  of  the  duty  of  the  said  George  Washing- 
ton Doane,  to  preside  impartially  over  said  Convention,  was  an 
attempt  to  conceal  his  own  indebtedness  from  the  Convention,  and 
was  immoral  and  unworthy  of  a  Christian  Bishop. 

Specification  24th. 
In  this, 

That  George   Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  during 
the  years  1847,  184S  and  1849,  in  New  Jersey,  for  the  purpose 
of    preserving   an   apparent    but    fictitious    credit,    while   trans- 
acting business  vastly  beyond  his  real  means  and  pecuniary  ability 
safely  to  conduct,  did  repeatedly  and  at  various  times,  draw  checks 
and  drafts  on  various  Banks,  to  wit,  on  the  Bank  of  Princeton,  the 
Morris  County  Bank,  the  People's  Bank  of  Paterson,  and  the  Me- 
chanics' Bank  of  Burlington,  when  he  had  no  funds  in  said  Banks 
respectively,  whereon  to  draw,  payable  to  various  persons  or  cor- 
porations, and  afterwards  and  before  the  maturity  of  said  checks, 
did  draw  other  checks  or  drafts  on  other  of  said  Banks,  when  he 
had  no  funds,  in  favor  of  the  Banks  whereon  the  first  checks  or 
drafts  had  been  drawn,  or  to  officers  thereof,  and  transmit  such 
checks   and    drafts  to  the  Banks,  or  to  the  officers  of  said  Banks 
in  whose  favor  they  were  payable,  for  the  purpose  of  meeting  and 
taking  up  the  checks  and  drafts  drawn  on  said  Banks  without 
funds;  and  did  repeat  the  said  process  of  drawing  checks  to  meet 
previous  checks,  without  funds  to  meet  them,  from  Bank  to  Bank, 
in  a  manner  deemed  disreputable  among  business  men  and  mer- 
chants; said  system  of  checks  and  counter-checks  being  contin- 
ued from  Bank  to  Bank,  till  said  George  Washington  Doane  might 
be  able  to  meet  them,  either  from  his  own,  or  by  borrowed  money, 
or  they  were  refused  payment  and  protested,  to  such  an  extent 
that  his  transactions  of  this  character  at  the  Bank  of  Princeton, 
between  January,  1847,  and  14  October,  1848,  amounted  to  the 
sum  of  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight  thousand  dollars. 

All  which  was  immoral  and  unbecoming  in  a  Christian  Bishop 


119 

Specification  25th. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  did, 
during  the  years  1847,  1848  and  1849,  procure  Michael  Hays  to 
indorse  notes  to  the  amount  of  more  than  ten  thousand  dollars, 
for  the  accommodation  of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in 
order  that  said  notes  might  be  discounted,  for  which  indorsements 
he  paid  or  engaged  to  pay  said  Michael  Hays,  at  an  exorbitant 
rate,  to  wit,  often  at  twenty  per  centum  per  annum,  on  the  several 
sums  for  which  said  notes  were  drawn,  thereby  violating  the  laws 
of  New  Jersey,  when  said  indorsements  were  made,  becoming 
guilty  of  usury  himself,  and  inducing  said  Hays  to  incur  equal 
guilt,  all  which  was  immoral  and  unbecoming  a  Bishop. 


or 
O 


Specification  26th» 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  in  the 
month  of  May,  1849,  in  Burlington  county,  New  Jersey,  when 
Joseph  Deacon  was  about  to  prefer  before  the  Grand  Jury  for  that 
county,  at  the  May  term  of  the  Court  for  that  county,  a  charge 
against  said  George  Washington  Doane,  for  obtaining  from  said 
Joseph  Deacon  his  indorsements  on  certain  promissory  notes,  under 
false  pretences,  as  specified  in  the  fourth  Specification  above,  did, 
for  the  purpose  of  inducing  said  Joseph  Deacon  to  refrain  from 
preferring  such  complaint,  promise  to  give  said  Joseph  Deacon,  if 
he  would  not  go  before  the  said  Grand  Jury  for  that  purpose,  a 
judgment  bond  for  the  amount  of  money,  or  some  part  thereof, 
for  which  said  Joseph  Deacon  had  become  liable,  by  reason  of  the 
fraudulent  use  of  said  indorsed  notes,  and  afterwards,  in  the  same 
month  and  year,  said  George  Washington  Doane,  having  been  in- 
formed that  said  Joseph  Deacon  still  intended  to  prefer  his  said 
complaint,  upon  said  Joseph  Deacon  requesting  the  execution  of 
said  judgment  bond,  did,  while  alone  with  said  Joseph  Deacon, 
who  was  a  verv  aged  man,  endeavor  to  intimidate  him,  bv 
doubling  his  fist  and  stretching  it  out  in  a  menacing  manner  tow- 
ards said  Joseph  Deacon,  uttering  the  words, — "  I'll  kill  you — I'll 
kill  you," — and  appearing  to  be  excited  with  extreme  passion. 

Which  conduct  of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  was  an  illegal 
attempt  to  impede  and  obstruct  the  course  of  Justice,  immoral 
and  unworthy  of  a  Christian  Bishop. 

Specification  27th. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having, 
on  the  26  day  of  March,  1849,  executed  an  assignment  of  his 
property,  real  and  personal,  to  Garret  S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B. 


120 

Aertsen,  in  trust,  to  sell,  collect  and  dispose  of  the  same,  and  dis- 
tribute the  proceeds  to  the  creditors  of  said  George  Washington 
Doane,  according  to  the  law  to  secure  creditors  an  equal  and  just 
division  of  the  estates  of  debtors,  conveying  to  assignees  for  the 
benefit  of  creditors;  and  an  inventory  having  been  made  out,  pur- 
porting to  be  and  entitled  "An  Inventory  of  the  estate,  real  and 
personal,  of  George  W.  Doane,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Bur- 
lington, assigned  to  Garret  S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B.  Aertsen,  for 
the  benefit  of  his  creditors,  together  with  a  list  of  his  creditors, 
and  the  amount  of  their  respective  claims,"  and  in  which  inven- 
tory the  values  of  the  various  articles  of  property,  real  and  per- 
sonal, purported  to  be  stated  and  set  forth,  the  said  George  Wash- 
ington Duane  did,  on  the  29th  day  of  March,  1849,  in  the  State  of 
New  Jersey,  before  John  Rodgers,  a  Master  in  Chancery,  and  a 
person  authorized  to  administer  the  oath  hereinafter  mentioned, 
make  oath,  "  being  duly  sworn  on  the  Holy  Evangelists  of  Al- 
mighty God,  that  the  said  inventory  is  a  true  and  perfect  inventory 
of  all  his  real  and    personal   property,  together  with  the  value 
thereof,  as  near  as  he  can  ascertain,  and  further  saith  not;"  but 
in  truth  and  fact,  the  said  inventory  did  not  set  forth  the  true  value 
of  the  property  therein  enumerated,  as  near  as  the  said  George 
Washington  Doane  could  ascertain;  but  on  the  contrary,  many 
pieces  of  said  property  were  in  said  inventory  set  down  at  values 
well  known  bv  said  George  Washington  Doane,  to  be  grossly  less 
than  the  real  values  thereof;  and  in  particular,  of  the  furniture  in 
St.  Mary's  Hall,  the  said  inventory  valued  twenty-one  piano  fortes 
at  six  hundred  and  fifty  dollars,  and  one  hundred  and  seventy-five 
bedsteads,  at  eighty-seven  dollars,  and  the  carpeting  and  oil  cloth, 
at  thirty-five  dollars,  and  the  looking-glasses,  chairs,  tables  and 
settees,  at  seventy-five  dollars,  the  kitchen  furniture,  and  bath  room 
furniture,  at  fifty  dollars,  all  which  articles  the  said  George  Wash- 
ington Doane,  well  knew,  or  could  have  ascertained,  were  worth 
greatly  more  than  the  values  aforesaid  in  the  inventory  mentioned  ; 
and  of  the  furniture,  household  goods,  &c.  at  Riverside,  the  said 
inventory  valued  the  desks,  chairs,  engravings,  stands,  &c.  of  the 
library,  at  seventy  dollars,  and  the  carpet,  rugs,  oil  cloth  and  blinds 
of  the  library  at  eighteen  dollars,  and  the  library,  consisting  of  about 
G,500  volumes  of  books  and  pamphlets,  at  seven  thousand  dollars, 
each  of  which  articles,  said  George  Washington  Doane  well  knew, 
or  could  have  ascertained,  were  worth  greatly  more  than  the  seve- 
ral values  aforesaid  assigned  to  them  in  said  inventory.  And  the  fur- 
niture in  the  drawing  room,  at  Riverside,  the  said  inventory  valued 
as  follows,  to  wit,  "  pictures,  sofa,  ottomans,  chairs,  tables,  center 
table  and  cover,  work  stand,  figure  and  pedestal,  clock  and  mantle 
ornaments,  carpet  and  rug,  and  vases,  at  $173.     And  the  furniture 
in  the  dining  room,  at  Riverside,  consisting  of  the  following  arti- 


121 

cles,  viz.  sideboard,  clock  and  mantle  ornaments,  case  of  drawers, 
looking  glass,  dining  table,  side  table,  chairs,  shovel  and  tongs, 
screen,  &c.  carpet  and  rug,  pictures  and  dumb  waiter,  at  $127, 
which  said  articles  of  furniture  in  said  drawing  room,  and  in  said 
dining  room,  at  Riverside,  the  said  George  Washington  Doane 
well  knew  were  worth  greatly  more  than  the  several  values  afore- 
said assigned  to  them  in  said  inventorv. 


Specification  28th. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  having 
made  the  assignment  in  the  foregoing  Specification  mentioned, 
did,  on  the  20th  of  March,  1849,  before  John  Rodgers,  Master  in 
Chancery,  being  authorized  to  administer  the  following  oath,  make 
oath  to  a  certain  affidavit  written  at  the  foot  of  that  part  of  ihe 
inventory  in  the  foregoing  specification  mentioned,  entitled  "List 
of  Creditors,"  and  purporting  to  contain  a  list  of  the  creditors  of 
said  George  Washington  Doane,  and  the  amount  of  t heir  respec- 
tive claims,  which  affidavit  is  in  the  following  words,  or  to  the 
following  effect,  to  wit,  "  State  of  New  Jersey,  Burlington  county  ; 
George  W.  Doane,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  upon  his 
oath  doth  depose  and  say,  that  the  above  is  a  true,  full  and  perfect 
list  of  his  creditors,  with  the  amounts  severally  due  to  them,  as 
far  as  he  hath  been  able  to  ascertain,  according  to  the  best  of  his 
knowledge,  and  further  saith  not." 

Whereas,  in  truth  and  in  fac,t,  the  said  inventory  above  said 
affidavit,  and  therein  referred  to,  did  not  contain  a  true,  full  and 
perfect  list  of  the  creditors  of  said  George  Washington  Doane, 
with  the  amounts  severally  due  on  them,  as  far  as  he  had  been 
able  to  ascertain  them,  according  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge; 
but  on  the  contrary,  said  inventorv  and  list  of  debts  omitted  the 
Treasurer  of  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of  New  Jersey,  and 
also  the  name  of  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of  New  Jersey, 
to  whom  the  said  George  Washington  Doane  well  knew  he  was 
indebted  in  the  sum  or  seven  thousand  dollars  at  least. 

It  did  not  contain  the  name  of  the  People's  Bank  at  Patcrson 
to  whom  he  owed  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars. 

It  omitted  the  name  of  the  Trenton  Banking  Company  to  which 
he  owed  eight  hundred  dollars  or  thereabouts. 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  name  of  the  Princeton  Bank  to  which 
he  was  indebted  one  thousand  and  seventy-seven  dollars. 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  name  of  the  Buck's  County  Bcmk  to 
which  he  was  indebted  one  thousand  dollars  or  thereabouts. 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  name  of  the  Morris  County  Bank  to 
which  he  owed  six  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  or  thereabouts. 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  names  of  the  Camden  Bank  nor  of  the 
Medford  Bank  to  each  of  which  he  was  largely  indebted. 


122 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  name  of  H.  R.  Cleveland  to  whom  he 
was  indebted  fifteen  thousand  dollars  as  he  well  knew. 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  name  of  William  Chester  to  whom  he 
owed  eight  hundred  dollars  as  he  well  knew. 

It  did  not  set  forih  the  name  of  Sarah  C.  Robardet  to  whom 
he  well  knew  he  owed  three  thousand  dollars. 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  name  of  William  E.  Pas:e  to  whom  he 
owed  five  hundred  dollars  as  he  well  knew. 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  name  of  Herman  Hooker  to  whom  he 
owed  seventy  dollars. 

It  did  not  sot  forth  the  names  of  the  several  persons  who  had 
advanced  money  to  said  George  Washington  Doane,  on  account 
of  said  fifty  thousand  dollar  loan,  to  whom  he  was  indebted  in 
the  several  sums  set  forth  in  the  Specification  above,  as  he  well 
knew. 

It  did  not  set  forth  the  name  of  Dennis  McEvoy  to  whom  he 
owed^wo  hundred  dollars  or  thereabouts. 

It  did  not  state  the  existence  of  divers  checks  drawn  on  the 
Mechanics'  Bank  of  Burlington,  unpaid  and  outstanding,  in  the 
hands  of  divers  persons  unknown. 

It  set  forth  Michael  Hays  as  a  creditor  to  the  amount  of  seven- 
teen thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  when  said  Michael  Hays  was 
a  creditor  of  said  Geo'rge  Washington  Doane  to  the  amount  of 
about  thirty  thousand  dollars. 

It  set  forth  Joseph  Deacon  as  a  creditor  for  twrenty-three  thou- 
sand four  hundred  dollars,  when  s;iid  Joseph  Deacon  was  a  credi- 
tor of  said  George  Washington  Doane  to  the  amount  of  thirty 
thousand  dollars  or  thereabouts. 

It  set  forth  Reuben  J.  Germain  as  a  creditor  to  the  amount  of 
one  thousand  dollars,  when  said  Reuben  J.  Germain  was  a  credi- 
tor of  said  George  Washington  Doane  for  five  thousand  three 
hundred  and  twenty-two  dollars  and  upwards,  not  of  the  moneys 
of  the  Convention  of  New  Jersey. 

All  which  particulars  said  George  Washington  Doane  at  the 
time  of  such  oath,  either  knew  or  was  able  to  have  ascertained 
with  ordinary  care  and  attention  :  and  the  swearing  falsely  to 
the  said  affidavit  in  the  particulars  aforesaid,  he  knowing  that  he 
had  the  means  of  ascertaining  the  particulars  aforesaid,  was  a 
sinful  disregard  of  the  solemnity  of  an  oath,  and  involved  the 
guilt,  either  of  deliberately  swearing  to  what  he  knew  to  be  un- 
true, or  of  rashly,  hastily  and  unadvisedly  swearing  to  what  he 
did  not  know  to  be  true. 

All  which  was  immoral  and  scandalous  in  a  Christian  Bishop. 

Specification  29th. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as   aforesaid,  in  the 


123 


year  1849,  in  New  Jersey,  after  he  had  made  the  assignment  in 
trust  for  the  benefit  of  his  creditors  in  the  27th  Specification  men- 
tioned, and  with  full  knowledge  of  the  amount  of  money  for 
which  the  personal  property  included  in  said  deed  had  been  sold 
by  the  trustees  in  said  deed,  and  that  such  amount  was  greatly 
and  manifestly  below  the  value  of  said  property,  and  that  the 
greater  part  of  the  said  articles  had  been  bought  in  at  inadequate 
prices  by  the  Trustees  of  Burlington  College,  or  by  members  of 
his  family,  or  his  particular  friends,  did  not  only  acquiesce  in  such 
sale,  and  fail  to  object  to  the  same  or  to  insist  on  a  fair  re-sale  of 
said  property,  but  accepted  and  received  a  portion  of  the  goods 
so  purchased,  at  grossly  inadequate  prices,  to  wit,  his  valuable 
library  and  plate  and  wines  and  contents  of  his  cellar,  whereby 
he  countenanced  the  said  sale,  and  failed  to  set  an  example  of 
honesty  and  self-denial,  and  on  the  contrary,  cast  suspicion  and 
discredit  on  his  holy  office  and  diminished  the  respect  therefor. 

And  that  said  sale  of  goods  and  chattels  so  assigned,  was  made 
at  prices  g'rossly  inadequate,  is  more  fully  apparent  from  the  fol- 
lowing specifications  of  the  values  of  sundry  of  the  articles  and 
the  prices  for  which  they  were  sold  by  said  Trustees; 

That  is  to  sav, 

1.  The  whole  of  said  goods  and  chattels  valued  in  the  inven- 
tory at  thirteen  thousand  seven  hundred  and  fifty-two  dollars, 
were  sold  for  the  sum  of  eleven  thousand  two  hundred  ninetv- 
three  dollars  and  ninety-six  cents. 

2.  The  silver  plate  valued  in  the  inventory  at  three  hundred 
dollars  and  worth  about  fifteen  hundred,  was  sold  for  seventy- 
nine  dollars  to  Edward  N.  Perkins,  the  son  of  Eliza  G.  Doane, 
wife  of  the  said  Bishop. 

3.  The  library,  consisting  of  six  thousand  five  hundred  volumes 
of  books  and  pamphlets,  and  valued  in  the  inventory  at  seven 
thousand  dollars,  was  sold  for  three  thousand  dollars  to  Caroline 
Watson. 

4.  The  conservatory  and  green  house  valued  at  one  hundred 
and  fifty  dollars  was  sold  to  Edward  N.  Perkins  the  son,  or  to 
Sarah  P.  Cleaveland,  the  daughter  of  Mrs.  Eliza  G.  Doane,  for 
twenty  dollars. 

5.  Contents  of  cellar,  valued  at  one  hundred  and  fifty  dollars, 
were  sold  to  Edward  N.  Perkins  for  two  dollars. 

G.  Three  barrels  of  wine  in  bottles,  of  the  value  of  about  two 
hundred  and  fifty  dollars,  for  twenty-six  dollars,  to  Edward  N. 
Perkins. 

7.  Two  casks  and  contents  of  wine,  of  the  value  of  about  fifty 
dollars,  for  seven  dollars,  to  Edward  N.  Perkins. 


124 

Specification  30th. 
In  t his, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  in  the 
year  1852,  in  New  Jersey,  did,  with  intent  to  conceal  or  excuse 
the  crimes  and  immoralities  in  the  foregoing  specifications,  or  in 
some  of  them,  laid  to  his  charge,  publish  a  certain  pamphlet 
known  as  " Bishop  Doane's  Protest,  Appeal  and  Reply,"  which 
said  pamphlet  is  more  minutely  described  in  the  second  specifica- 
tion above,  in  which  said  pamphlet  the  said  George  Washington 
Doane  did  publish  among  other  things,  the  following  false  allega- 
tions and  statements,  knowing  them  to  be  false.    That  is  to  say, — 

At  the  last  paragraph  of  that  part  of  said  pamphlet  known  as 
the  "Appeal,"  said  George  Washington  Doane  did  "declare,  as 
under  the  immediate  eve  of  God,  to  his  Right  Reverend  Brethren, 
his  entire  and  perfect  integrity  and  innocence,  as  to  all  and  singu- 
lar, the  charges  made  against  him,"  whereas,  in  truth  and  in  fact, 
he  was  not  so  innocent,  but  on  the  contrary,  was  guilty  in  the 
particulars  above  specified.  The  said  George  Washington  Doane, 
in  that  part  of  said  pamphlet  known  as  the  Reply,  says,  "the  un- 
dersigned (meaning  himself)  never  represented  himself  to  Michael 
Hays  as  solvent  and  able  to  pay  his  debts,"  when  in  truth  and 
fact,  he  had  so  represented  himself  repeatedly,  to  said  Michael 
Hays. 

The  said  George  Washington  Doane  states  in  said  Reply,  that 
"The  Treasurer"  (meaning  the  said  Reuben  J.  Germain,  Trea- 
surer of  the  Convention  of  the  Diocese  of  New  Jersey,)  "lent 
him  his  uninvested  funds "  (meaning  seven  thousand  dollars  of 
the  money  of  the  Convention,)  "temporarily,  on  his  notes,"  and 
he  further  states  that  "  it  (meaning  the  funds  so  loaned  to  him  on 
his  notes.)  has  been  perfectly  secured,"  when  in  truth  and  fact, 
there  was  no  stipulation  nor  understanding  that  said  loan  should 
be  temporary;  nor  had  the  same  been  perfectly  secured  at  the 
date  of  said  publication,  either  to  said  R.  J.  Germain,  or  to  said 
Convention. 

The  said  George  Washington  Doane  states  in  said  Reply,  that 
"  There  were  several  Banks  in  New  Jersey,  at  which  special 
friends  of  the  undersigned"  (meaning  himself")  "and  of  his  work, 
were  influential,  in  many  cases  as  Presidents  and  Cashiers,  on 
which  he  w7as  permitted  to  draw  short  drafts,  from  time  to  time, 
to  be  discounted  and  placed  to  his  credit,"  and  that  "  Pie  drew  no 
other  checks,  but  in  connection  with  his  discounts,  on  any  Bank, 
but  that  in  Burlington,  in  which  he  kept  his  account;"  when  in 
fact  and  truth,  he  was  not  authorized  or  permitted  by  any  one 
having  right  to  allow  the  same,  to  draw  short  drafts,  in  the  man- 
ner stated  in  said  pamphlet;  and  he  did  draw  checks  on  said 
Banks,  which  he  had  not  been  permitted  or  authorized  to  draw. 


125 

The  said  George  Washington  Doane  stated  in  said  Reply,  that 
"the  onlv  ground  of  this  false  allegation"  (meaning  the  allega- 
gation  of  "  drawing  checks  on  the  Burlington  Bank,  when  he  had 
no  money  in  said  Bank,  and  after  he  had  been  told  by  an  officer 
of  said  Bank,  that  he  must  not  draw  checks  on  said  Bank,  when 
he  had  no  money  there,")  "  is  the  habit  of  the  undersigned"  (mean- 
ing said  George  Washington  Doane)  "to  make  good  his  account 
everv  dav  at  3  o'clock.  Checks  which  came  in,  in  theearlv  part 
of  the  day,  would  often  be  unprovided  for  at  that  time.  Provis- 
ion was  made  to  meet  them  daily,  until  the  sickness  occurred  ;" 
when  in  truth  and  fact,  said  George  Washington  Doane  drew 
many  checks  on  said  Bank  prior  to  said  sickness,  and  after  said 
sickness,  for  which  provision  was  not  made  by  3  o'clock,  nor  at 
any  other  period  of  the  day,  when  they  were  payable. 

The  said  George  Washington  Doane  states  in  said  Reply,  that 
"the  undersigned"  (meaning  himself )" denies  entirely  the  pre- 
tence charged  above"  (meaning  the  charge  that  "  he  obtained  t he 
indorsements  of  Michael  Hays  under  pretence  that  they  were  to 
renew  notes  previously  indorsed  by  said  Michael  Hays,  and  after 
obtaining  such  notes  for  such  avowed  objects,  appropriating  them 
to  other  purposes,  to  an  amount  much  larger  than  he  would  have 
been  willing  to  indorse  for  said  George  Washington  Doane") 
whereas  the  said  pretence  charged  was  true,  and  the  denial  there- 
of  bv  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  said  Renlv,  was  false. 

The  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  said  Reply,  did  state 
that  the  said  denial  above  quoted,  was  applicable  to  the  charge 
of  obtaining  the  indorsements  of  Joseph  Deacon,  under  the  same 
pretence,  charged  above  as  to  Michael  Havs'  indorsements;  which 
denial  of  said  George  Washington  Doane,  was  in  like  manner 
false. 

The  said  George -Washington  Doane,  in  said  Reply,  states  that 
"the  undersigned"  (meaning  himself)  "when  on  the  visitation  of 
a  portion  of  his  Diocese,  had  been  the  bearer  of  a  letter  from  the 
former  Treasurer  of  the  Society  for  the  Promotion  of  Christian 
Knowledge  and  Piety,  to  the  Rev.  Mr.  Stubbs,  then  newly  ap- 
pointed to  that  office.  As  afterwards  appeared,  it  contained  bank 
notes  for  one  thousand  dollars,  being  so  much  of  the  funds  of  the 
Society.  In  the  course  of  his  visit,  Mr.  Stubbs  said  to  him,  that 
he  had  that  money;  that  he  did  not  know  what  was  best  to  do 
with  it;  that  if  it  would  be  of  anv  use  to  t  he  undersigned,  in  car- 
rying  on  his  institutions,  he  hadjather  it  were  in  his  hands  than 
any  where  else;  that  he  only  wanted  customary  securitv.  The 
undersigned  hesitated,  but  received  it." 

When  in  truth  and  fact,  said  George  Washington  Doane  was 
not  the  bearer  of  said  money  to  said  Stubbs,  as  above  stated,  and 
said  Stubbs  did   not  say  "  he  only  wanted   customary  securitv," 


126 

but  loaned  the  mpney  on  condition  that  said  George  Washington 
Doane  would  give  him  "  proper  security." 

By  all  which  false  allegations,  said  George  Washington  Doane 
has  added  the  guilt  of  falsehood,  attested  by  very  solemn  assev- 
eration, lo  the  other  immoralities  laid  above  to  his  charge. 

Specification  3  1st. 

In  this, 

That  George  Washington  Doane,  Bishop  as  aforesaid,  has  du- 
ring his  Episcopate,  and  especially-  during  the  years,  1845,  1846. 
1847,  1818,  1849,  1850,  1851  and  1852,  been*  repeatedly  guilty 
of  using  spirilous  and  intoxicating  liquors  to  a  degree  and  in  a 
manner  unbecoming  in  a  Bishop. 

That  on  or  about  the  month  of  November,  in  the  year  1851, 
the  said  George  Washington  Doane  was  intoxicated  on  board 
ihe  steamboat  Trenton,  plying  between  Philadelphia  and  Bur- 
lington. 

That  at  various  times  during  the  years  1840,  1847,  1848  and 
1849,  said  George  Washington  Doane  was  in  the  habit,  when  on 
visits  to  the  house  of  Joseph  Deacon,  for  the  purpose  of  obtain- 
ing indorsements  or  other  assistance  in  his  pecuniary  transactions, 
of  calling  for  Cider  Brandy,  or  other  intoxicating  liquor,  and 
drinking  the  same  to  a  degree  and  in  a  manner  unbecoming  in  a 
Bishop,  and  tending  to  lower  the  respect  of  the  people  for  his  said 
office. 

That  during  the  years  aforesaid,  said  George  Washington  Doane 
was  in  the  habit  of  providing  and  procuring  for  his  use,  larger 
quantities  of  wines  and  spiritous  liquors  in  his  house,  than  was  fit 
and  becoming  in  a  Christian  Bishop,  especially  in  his  condition  of 
pecuniary  embarrassment  during  those  years. 

Wherefore  the  undersigned,  William  Meade,  D.  D.,  Bishop  of 
the    Protestant    Episcopal    Church    in    the   Diocese   of  Virginia, 
Charles  Pettit  Mcllvaine,  D.  IX,  Bishop  of  the  Protestant  Episco- 
pal Church  in  the  Diocese  of  Ohio,  and  George  Burgess,  D.  D., 
Bishop   of  the   Protestant   Episcopal'  Church  in   the   Diocese   of 
Maine,  do  say,  that  the  said  George   Washington   Doane,  D.  D,. 
Bishop  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  Diocese  of  New 
Jersey,  is  guilty   of  crime   and   immorality,  in   the  specifications 
above  set  forth;  and  therefore  they  pray  that  the  Bishops  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States  of  America,  be 
summoned  to  trv  the  above  named  George   Washington   Doane, 
Bishop  as  aforesaid,  on  this  Presentment,  according  to  the  canon 
in  such  cases  made  and  provided. 

WILLIAM  MEADE,  D.  D., 

Bishop  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church 
in  the  Diocese  of  Virginia. 


127 


t 


CHARLES  PETTI T  McILVAINE,  D.  D., 
Bis/top  of  the  ProU  Ep.  Church  in  Ohio. 

GEORGE  BURGESS,  D.  D., 

Bishop  of  the  Prot.  Ep.  Church  in  Maine. 

February  25th, 
Eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-three. 


DEED  OF  ASSIGNMENT. 

George   W.  Doane, 

to 
Garret  S.  Cannon  and  ct  al. 

This  Indenture,  made  the  twenty-sixth  day  of  March,  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  fortv-nine,  be- 
tvyeen  George  W.  Doane,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington 
and  state  of  New  Jersey,  party  of  the  first  part,  and  Garret 
S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B.  Aertsen,  of  the  county  and  state  afore- 
said, party  of  the  second  part — Witnesseth,  that  the  said  George 
\V.  Doane,  for  the  purpose  of  securing  to  his  creditors-  an  equal 
distribution  of  his  estate,  and  for  the  consideration  of  one  dollar 
io  him  in  hand  paid  by  the  said  Garret  S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B. 
Aertsen,  the  receipt  whereof  is  hereby  acknowledged,  hath  grant- 
ed, bargained,  sold,  conveyed  and  assigned,  and  by  these  presents 
doth  grant,  bargain,  sell,  convey  and  assign  unto  the  said  Garret 
S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B.  Aertsen,  and  to  their  heirs  and  assigns, 
and  to  the  survivor  of  them,  his  heirs  and  assigns,  all  and  singu- 
lar the  lauds,  tenements,  hereditaments  and  reaL  estate  whereof 
the  said  George  VV.  Doane  is  now  seized  or  possessed,  or  in  any 
way  entitled  to,  wheresoever  the  same  may  be  situate,  together 
with  the  appurtenances,  and  also  all  nnd  singular  his  goods  and 
chattels,  bonds,  notes,  books  of  account,  contracts,  rights  and 
credits  whatsoever  and  wheresoever ;  to  have  and  to  hold  the 
same,  and  every  part  and  parcel  thereof  unto  the  said  Garret  S. 
Cannon  and  Robert  B.  Aertsen  their  heirs  and  assigns  as  joint 
tenants,  and  to  the  survivor  of  them,  his  heirs  and  assigns  for 
ever;  in  trust  to  sell,  collect  and  dispose  of  the  same  and  dis- 
tribute the  proceeds  to  the  creditors  of  the  said  George  W.  Doane, 
in  proportion  to  their  several  just  demands,  pursuant  to  the  direc- 
tions of  the  act  of  the  legislature  of  the  state  of  New  Jersey,  en- 
titled an  act  to  secure  to  creditors  an  equal  and  just  division  of 
the  estates  of  debtors  who  convey  to  assignees  for  the  benefit  of 


128 

creditor?,  and  in  frirther  tryst  to  pay  the  surplus,  if  any  there  be 
after  fully  satisfying  and  paying  the  said  creditors  and  all  proper 
costs  and  charges,  to  the  said  George  W.  Doane.  In  witness 
whereof,  the  said  George  \V.  Doane  hath  hereunto  set  his  hand 
and  seal,  the  day  and  year  first  above  written. 

Signed,  sealed  and  delivered 
in  the  presence  of 

Joel    VV.  Coxdit, 
Jxo.  J.   Chetwood. 

G.  VV.  DOANE,  [l.  s.] 

State  of  New  Jersey,  ss. 

Be  it  remembered,  that  on  the  twenty-sixth  day  of  March,  in 
the  year  of  our  Lord  one  ihousand  ei^ht  hundred  and  forty-nine, 
before  me,  the  subscriber,  one  of  the  Masters  of  the  Court  of 
Chancery  of  said  state,  personally  appeared  George  VV.  Doane, 
who  is,  1  am  satisfied,  the  grantor  named  in  the  foregoing  deed  of 
assignment,  and  who,  the  contents  of  the  same  beinir  by  me  first 
made  known  to  him,  acknowledged  that  he  signed,  sealed  and  de- 
livered the  same  as  his  voluntary  act  and  deed,  for  1  he  uses  and 
purposes  therein  mentioned,  all  which  is  certified  by  me. 

Jxo.  J.  Chetwood,  Master  in  Chancery. 

An  inventory  of  the  estate,  real  and  personal,  of  George  VV. 
Doane,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington,  assigned  to  Garret 
S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B.  Aertsen,  for  the  benefit  of  his  creditors, 
together  with  a  list  of  his  creditors  and  the  amount  of  their  res- 
pective claims. 

I X  VEX  TORY    OF    ESTATE. 

Real  Estate. 

No.  1. — Dwelling  house  and  buildings,  with  the  pre- 
mises, known  as  St.  Mary's  Hall,  fronting  on  the 
Delaware  river,  and  bounded  on  the  cast  by  Ellis 
street,  on  the  south  by  Pearl  street,  and  on  the 
west  by  the  homestead  property  of  G.  VV.  Donne, 
known  as  Riverside,  subject  to  a  mortgage  for 
87,000  to  J.  Deacon  ;  also  to  another  mortgage  to 
J.  Deacon  for  $S,000 ;  also  to  a  mortgage  to  J.  B. 
Parker  and  others  in  trust  for  $10,800. 

Valued  at,  $1.00 

No.  2. — The  homestead  property,  known  as  Riverside, 
fronting  on   the  Delaware   river,  and  bounded  on 


Amount  carried  over,  $1.00 


129 

Amount  brought  forward,  $1.00 

the  east  by  St.  Mary's  Hall,  on  the  south  by  Pearl 
street,  and  on  the  west  by  Reed  street,  subject  to  a 
mortgage  to  J.  Deacon  for  $5,000 ;  also  a  mortgage 
to  H.  R.  Cleveland,  in  trust,  for  $15,000;  also  to  a 
mortgage  to  L.  Carter  for  $10,000,  on  which  about 
$4,000  has  been  paid. 

Valued  at,  1.00 

No.  3. — A  farm,  containing  twelve  acres,  more  or 
less,  lying  between  Burlington  College  property  and 
the  railroad,  subject  to  a  mortgage  to  Wm.  Ches- 
ter for  $800  ;  also  to  a  mortgage  to  Sarah  C.  Ro- 
bardet  for  $3,000.  • 

Valued  at,  1.00 

No.  4. — A  piece  of  meadow  and  pasture  ground, 
about  six  acres,  near  London  Bridge  Creek,  in  the 
towmship  of  Burlington,  subject  to  a  mortgage  to 

Woolman  for  $300 ;  and  also  to  a  mortgage 

to  Mrs.  Vandegrift  for  $113. 

Valued  at,  1.00 

On  these  four  above  described  pieces  of  property 

there  is  a  further  mortgage  of  $30,000  to  Isaac  B. 

Parker  and  others,  in  trust. 

Nos.  5,  6  and  7 — Are  three  lots  of  fifty  feet  each,  on 
Pearl  street,  in  the  rear  of  Burlington  College,  and 
adjoining  property  of  T.  B.  Woolman,  subject  to 
two  small  mortgages,  together  $230. 

Valued  at,  670.00 

Furniture,  Household  Goods,  &c,  jx 
Burlixgtox  College. 

In  Parlor. 

Sofa,  chairs,  table,  lamps,  Bi*le,  vases,  stove,  carpet,  825.00 

Library. 
Desk,  chairs,  wash-stand,  looking-glass,  10.00 

Front  Hall. 
Stove,  oil  cloth,  rugs,  stair  carpet,  3.50 

Dining  Hall. 
Tables,  stove,  table  cloths,  cups  and  saucers,  soup 

tureens,  tumblers,  bells,  &c,  40.00 

Large  and  small  knives  and  forks,  dinner  plates,  and 

dinner  ware  generally,  in  its  variety,  100.00 

Amount  carried  over,  $1,652.50 


130 

Amount  brought  forward,  $1,652.50 

Dormilorys. 

135  bedsteads,  beds   and   mattrasses,   comfortables, 
counterpanes,  blankets,  pillows,  &c,  sheets,  pillow 

cases,  napkins,  towels,  wash-stands,  bowls,  &c,  600.00 
Pails,  looking-glasses,  oil  cloth,  desks,  glass  lamps, 

wardrobes,  &c,  &c,  25.00 

Furniture  in  school  room,  250.00 

"             Junior  Hall,  240.00 

"             Infirmary,  13.00 

"             Teachers  and  recitation  rooms,  22.00 

"             Kitchen,  30.00 

M   #         Basement  roo\ns,  15.00 

Two  boats,  50.00 

Furniture,  Household  Goods,  in  St.  Mary's  Hall. 

21  piano  fortes,  650.00 

175  bedsteads,  87.50 

Beds  and  bedding,  175,  1,000.00 

Wash-stands,  bowls  and  pitchers,  90.00 

Carpeting  and  oil  cloth,  35.00 

Looking-glasses,  chairs  and  tables  and  settees,  75.00 

Desks,  apparatus,  shelves,  minerals,  books,  150.00 
Tables,  plates,  knives  and  forks,  spoons,  tea  sets,  tea 

and  coffee  pots,  &c,  300.00 

Kitchen  furniture,  bath-room  furniture,  50.00 

Stoves  and  pipe,  &c,  75.00 

Furniture,  Household  Goods,  &c,  at  Riverside. 

Library. 

Desks,  chairs,  sofa,  engravings,  stands,  &c,  70.00 
Carpet,  rugs,  oil  cloth,  blinds,  18.00 
Library,  consisting  of  about  6,500  flumes  and  pam- 
phlets, 7,000.00 

In  Hall. 

Chairs,  stoves,  stools,  hat  stands,  oil  cloth,  pictures, 

rugs,  30.00 

Inner  Hall. 

Ottamans,  sofas,  rugs,  table,  oil  cloth,  50.00 

Bach  Parlor. 

Cabinet,  book  shelf,  sofa,  mahogany  chairs,  table  and 
cover,  carpet  and  rug,  work  stand*  pictures,  looking- 


Amount  carried  over,  $12,578.00 


131 


Amount  brought  forward, 
glass,  mantle  and  table  ornaments,  window  curtains, 
stands,  &c, 

Drawing  Room. 

Pictures,  sofa,  ottamans,  chairs,  tables,  centre  table 
and  cover,  work  stand,  figure  and  pedestal,  clock 
and  mantle  ornaments,  carpet  and  rug,  vases, 

Dining  Room. 

Sideboard,  clock  and  mantle  ornaments,  case  of  draw- 
ers, looking-glass,  dining  table,  side  table,  chairs, 
shovel  and  tongs,  screen,  &c,  carpet  and  rug,  pic- 
tures, dumb  waiter, 

Entry  and  Stairs. 

Stair  carpeting  and  oil  cloth,  blind, 

Oil  cloth  and  carpeting,  in  entries,  on  second  floor, 

River  Chamber. 

Bedstead  and  bedding,  sofa,  arm  chair,  windsor 
chairs,  window  cortains,  bureau,  chest  of  drawers, 
wash  stand  and  furniture,  stool,  table  and  cover, 
carpet,  mantle  ornaments,  pictures,  and-irons,  &c, 

Garden  Chamber. 

Bedstead  and  bedding,  wash  stand  and  furniture, 
bureau  and  glass,  chairs,  carpet,  table  and  stool, 
and-irons,  &c,  prints,  window  curtains, 

Jerusalem  Chamber. 

Bedstead  and  bedding,  bureau  and  glass,  wash  stands 
and  furniture,  wardrobe,  carpet,  chairs,  stand,  prints, 

First  Floor  Chamber. 
Bedstead  and  bedding,  looking-glass,  bureaus,  steps, 
tables,   chairs,   carpet,    wardrobes,  curtains,  and- 
irons, &c,  wash  stand,  &c, 

Third  Floor  Chamber. 

Stair  carpet,  bedsteads  and  bedding,  carpet,  ward- 
robes, blinds,  pictures, 
Furniture  in  servants'  chamber, 
do.  do.  do. 

Basement  Room. 

Book  case,  bureau,  table,  wash  stands,  &c,  chairs,, 
carpet,  stove, 


$12,578.00 
146.50 


173.00 


127.00 

45.00 
20.00 


95.00 


52.50 


49.00 


195.00 


61.00 
25.00 
15.00 


30.00 


Aamount  carried  over, 


$13,612.00 


132 

Amount  brought  forward,  $13,612.00 

Nursery. 
Bedstead    and    bedding,   carpet,   wash   stand,   &c., 

bureaus,  chairs,  24.00 

China  $115,  household  linen  $60,  175.00 

Plate  $300,  contents  of  cellar  $150,  450.00 

Kitchen  furniture,  30.00 

Conservatory  and  green  house,  150.00 

Farming  Stock,  fyc. 

Eleven  cows,  thirty  pigs,  two  carts,  one  wagon,  three 
ploughs,  cultivator,  harrow,  five  horses,  two  car- 
riages, garden  tools,  boiler,  760.00 

Wash  house  utensils,  25.00 

Two  protested  notes,  due  by  William  Foster,  for  $260, 
considered  of  no  value. 

My  claim  upon  the  trustees  of  Burlington  College  for 

taxes,  insurance  and  interest  paid,  1,500.00 

(Exclusive  of  any  claim  I  may  have  for  buildings  and 
permanent  improvements  on  the  property  of  the 
College.) 

Due  from  Pupils  in  St.  Mary's  Hall. 


From 

Miss 

;  Jane  Henry, 

$135.00 

u 

(< 

Eliza  M.  Cutchen, 

150.00 

u 

a 

Anna  Prior, 

75.00 

it 

it 

Rebecca  Bennett, 

38.00 

a 

a 

Margaret  Johnson, 

112.50 

a 

a 

Elizabeth  Servoss, 

135.00 

it 

it 

Isabella  Servoss, 

135.00 

u 

a 

Anna  Lawton, 

277.00 

it 

a 

Francis  Van  Allen, 

150.00 

tt 

it 

Fanny  Jessup, 

150.00 

tt 

a 

Hellen  Burroughs, 

135.00 

1  40°  fifl 

1  ,*±t7<*.«JU 

$17,418.50 

State  of  New  Jersey,  )  . 
r>     ,.     ,  ,  >  to  wit : 

Burlington  county.        ) 

George  W.  Doane,  being  duly  sworn,  upon  the  Holy  Evange- 
lists of  Almighty  God,  doth  depose  and  say,  that  the  above  is  a 
true  and  perfect  inventory  of  all  his  real  and  personal  property, 
together  with  the  value  thereof,  as  near  as  he  can  ascertain,  and 
further  saith  not.  G.  W.  DOANE. 

Sworn  and  subscribed,  before  me,  the  twenty-ninth  day  of  March, 

eighteen  hundred  and  forty-nine.  John  Rodoers, 

Master  in  Chancery. 


133 


D. 


List  of  Creditors. 

Bond  to  the  Female  Benevolent  Society,  600.00 

"     "  Sarah  Vansciver,  400.00 

"     "  Rev.  A.  Stubbs,  Treasurer,  1,000.00 

"     "  Samuel  Haddon,  400.00 

Joseph  Deacon,  indorsements,  23,450.00 

Michael  Hays,          do.  17,500.00 

Lawson  Carter,        do.  6,000.00 

Sundry  notes  whose  indorsers  are  uncertain,  4,447.36 

J.  C.  Garthvvaite,  indorsements,  1,470.45 

Jos.  L.  Powell,  2,000.00 

William  S.  Faitoute,  Newark,  2,508.00 

Thomas  B.  Woolman,  Burlington,  4,030.05 

Thomas  Dugdale  &  Son,     "  2,375.00 

Taylor  &  Dugdale,               "  2,794.74 

Thomas  Milnor,                    "  2,951.26 

Thomas  Dutton,                    "  2,494.31 

David  Harmer,                      "  449.92 

Francis  Roth,                        "  1,241.31 

John  Mitchell,                       "  118.29 

George  P.  Mitchell,              "  611.54 

William  Stone,                     "  507.83 

A.  A.  Sloan,                           "  670.80 

R.  H.  Parsons,                       "  1,152.06 

F.  Woolman,                         "     about,  1,000.00 
Sundry  notes  indorsed  by  R.  J.  Germain,  and  nego- 

ciated  by  F.  Woolman,  1 ,983.25 

C.  Hand,                         Burlington,  44.48 

Mrs.  C.  Lippincott,                "  11,951.67 

1,700.00 

1,000.00 

5,946.09 

519.13 


Mrs.  A.  L.  Winslow, 

George  D.  Winslow, 
Isaac  B.  Parker, 
William  H.  Carse, 
Sundry  bills  contracted  by  W.  H.  Carse,  for  me,  592.37 

J.  A.  Shreve,  Burlington,  787.47 

William  Reek,  "  376.56 

William  B.  Price,  "  451.05 

Wardrop  J.  Hall,  "  127.58 

Amount  carried  over,  $103,653.26 


134 

Amount  brought  forward,  $103,653.26 

J.  W.  Fenimore,           Burlington,  22.50 

B.  Fenimore,  "        about  1,350.00 

Joseph  Pedrick,  "  53.00 

W.  J.  Allinson,  "  181.95 

W.  C.  Myers,  "  63.24 

S.C.Atkinson,  "  152.43 

Edward  Connor,  "  279.16 

D.  S.  Read,  M  23.48 

Warren  Scott,  "  67.60 

Charles  Johnson,  "  1,461.16 

Vandegrift,  "  40.00 

R.  Blackwood,  "  137.00 

Edmund  Morris,  "  135.62 

William  A.  Rogers,  "  114.46 

S.  Hanse,  "  127.86 

Brown  &  Stevenson,  "  338.75 

James  Germain,  "  5,956.89 

Ira  V.  Germain,  "  3,293.00 

R.  J.  Jermain,  "  1,000.00 

Mrs;  Bishop,  "  300.00 

Rev.*  S.  W.  Hallawell,  "  650.00 

George  W.  Hewitt,  "  595.00 

Signor  Palidini,  "  565.00 

A.  Engstrom,  "  2,012.00 

G.  Kax  Wagner,  "  299.00 

William  Fife,  "  80.00 

Miss  Loley,  "  375.00 

Mrs.  Lamotte,  "  150.00 

Miss  Stanley,  "  450.00 

Miss  Chamberlain,  "  264.00 

Miss  Lane,  "  683.87 

Miss  Crouyn,  "  375.00 

Miss  Barrington,  "  150.00 

Miss  Thompson,  "  540.00 

Miss  Matthews,  "  170.00 

Miss  Germain,  "  425.00 

Miss  Morgan,  "  87.50 

Miss  Hale,  "  200.00 

Miss  Whittlesey,  "  225.00 

Miss  Brook,  "  100.00 

Miss  Hewitt,  "  135.00 

Dr.  Bagnet,  "  670.00 

Amount  carried  over,  $117,952.73 


ii 
it 
ft 
u 

tt 
a 
it 
it 
a 
it 
a 
a 
ti 


135 

Amount  brought  forward, 
Rev.  J.  H.  Bradin,         Burlington, 
Mr..  Hyde, 
Mr.  Billsbey, 
Mr.  Trimble, 
Mr.  Barrington, 
Mr.  Holden, 
Mr  Tuttle, 
Mr*  Mitchell, 
Mr-  Crooke, 
Mr.  Tenner, 
Mr.  Swoope, 
Mr.  Green, 
Mrs.  Clark, 
Miss  Alison, 
Servants  and  Employees,  at  College  and  St.  Mary's 

Hall, 
Munsig  &  Bowman,  Albany, 

D.  F.  Fell  &  Co.,  Philadelphia, 
C.  P.  Wayne  &  Son, 
Gillespie  &  Robinson, 
Morgan  &  Co., 
L.  J.  Levey, 
H.  L.  Sipman, 
P.  B.  Gustine, 
M.  P.  Mitchell, 
W.  J.  Maddock, 
J.  Hastings, 
Smith  &  Hodgson, 

E.  C.  Knight, 
Baily  &  Co., 
Fred.  Brown, 
Carey  &  Hart, 
John  Pennington, 
Tyndall  &  Mitchell, 
C.  Oakford, 
W.  Y.  Mason, 
J.  P.  Moss, 
Johnson, 
Zieber  &l  Co., 
E.  Townsend, 
T.  Sharpless  &  Son, 
W.  D.  Parrish  &  Co., 


tt 


tt 


tt 


it 


a 


tt 


tt 


a 


it 


a 


tt 


a 


a 


tt 


a 


a 


a 


a 


a 


it 


tt 


tt 


a 


it 


127,952.73 

1,000.00 

299.00 

90.00 

100.00 

100.00 

200.00 

190.00 

225.00 

100.00 

250.00 

100.00 

65.00 

46.60 

100.00 

1,490.15 

2,074.66 

449.15 

298.11 

368.63 

996.00 

102.78 

106.30 

30.00 

225.00 

410.97 

277.61 

71.65 

84.84 

212.65 

192.50 

122.05 

143.24 

75.55 

21.00 

17.00 

37.65 

50.00 

38.00 

21.00 

912.17 

20.42 


Amount  carried  over, 


$139,667.41 


136 

Amount  brought  forward,  $139,667.41 

Joseph  Brown,         Philadelphia,  10.38 

F.  S.  Cowpland,                "  40.00 

G.  S.  Appleton,  "  393.67 
Philip  Reilly,  "  649.57 
E.  C.  &  J.  Biddle,  "  824.62 
N.  Souders,  "  51.75 
Eagle  Foundry,  Mount  Holly,  432.77 
G.P.Putnam,  New  York,  71.50 
J.  Wiley,  "  600.00 
D.  Appleton  &  Co.,  "  57.00 
D.  Dana,  "  20.00 
Stanford  &  Swords,  "  15.00 
Harper  &  Brothers,  "  217.06 
Leavit,  Trow  &  Co.,  "  31.25 
Benard  &  Munden,  "  91.00 
Ward  &  Exall,  Newark,  about  150.00 
Little  &  Brown,  Boston,  53.08 
Sundry  small  items,  say  100.00 
John  Wiley,  New  York,  118.00 
Claims  of  W.  J.  Hall  and  A.  A.  Sloan,  against  the 

Building  erected  on  Burlington  College  property, 
amount  unknown,  but  supposed  not  to  exceed  ten 
thousand  dollars,  10,000.00 


$155,593.67 


State  of  New  Jersey,  >         .. 
Burlington  County,     ) 

George  W.  Doane,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  upon 
his  oath  doth  depose  and  say,  that  the  above  is  a  true,  full  and 
perfect  list  of  his  creditors,  with  the  amounts  severally  due  to 
them,  as  far  as  he  hath  been  able  to  ascertain,  according  to  the 
best  of  his  knowledge,  and  further  saith  not. 

G.  W.  DOANE. 
Sworn  and  subscribed  this  twenty-ninth  ) 

day  of  March,  eighteen  hundred  and  J> 

forty-nine,  before  me,  ^ 

John  Rodgers,  Master  in  Chancery. 

State  of  New  Jersey,  ) 
Burlington  County,     $ 

I,  Benjamin  Buckman,  Surrogate  of  the  county  of  Burlington, 
do  hereby  certify  that  the  within  named  Garret  S.  Cannon  and 
Robert  B.  Aertson,  hath  entered  into  bond  to  the  Ordinary  of  the 


137 

state  of  New  Jersey,  with  Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaite,  L.  Mailliard, 
and  Stephen  Cubberly,  sufficient  security  for  the  faithful  perform- 
ance of  the  trusts  in  the  within  assignment  contained,  according 
to  the  statute. 

Dated  April  10th,  1849. 

BENT.  BUCKMAN,  Surrogate. 
Recorded  April  10th,  A.  D.,  1849. 

JOSEPH  F.  BURR,  Clerk. 

State  of  New  Jersey,  ) 

/  ss. 
Burlington  County,     ) 

I,  Joseph  F.  Burr,  Clerk  of  the  Inferior  Court  of  Common  Pleas 
of  the  County  of  Burlington,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  aforego- 
ing is  a  true  copv  of  the  record  of  the  deed  of  assignment  be- 
tween  the  parties  named  therein,  as  full  and  entire  as  the  same 
remains  of  record  in  my  office,  in  Book  U  4  of  Deeds,  page 
619,  &c. 

In  testimony  whereof  I  have  hereto   set  my  hand 
[l.  s.]  and  the  seal  of  the  said   Court,  this  third  day  of 

July,  A.  D.  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-nine. 

JOSEPH  F.  BURR,  Clerk. 


E  1. 


Extract  from  the  Inventory  of  the  estate,  property  and  effects  of 
the  People's  Bank  of  Paterson,  the  nature  and  probable  value 
thereof,  and  an  account  of  debts  due  to  and  from  said  Bank, 
made  by  Cornelius  S.  Van  Wagoner,  William  F.  Day  and  Jacob 
Van  Arsdale,  Receivers  for  the  creditors  and  stockholders  of 
said  Bank,  appointed  by  the  Chancellor  of  the  State  of  New 
Jersey,  by  two  certain  orders,  bearing  date  respectively  the  29th 
day  of  September,  1851,  and  the  2d  day  of  October,  1851. 

"Note,G.W.  Doane,  drawer  or  acceptor ;  E.  B.  D.  Ogden,  en- 
dorser ;  date,  Jan.  4,  1848  ;  time,  twelve  months ;  due  Jan.  7, 1849  ; 
not  paid;  amount,  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars." 


E2. 


Supreme  Court,  New  Jersev. 

Michael  Hays,      )  r    7 

J  f  In  lease. 

n  txV   -Tk  (  On  Judgment,  &c. 

George  W.  Doane.  )  b 

Examination  of  the  above  named  defendant,  George  W.  Doane, 


1: 

taken  before  me,  at  my  office  in  the  city  of  Trenton,  this  twenty- 
ninth  day  of  January,  A.  D.  1853,  under  an  order  for  that  pur- 
pose made  by  Honorable  Stacy  G.  Potts,  one  of  the  Justices  of 
said  Court,  bearing  date  on  the  twenty-fourth  day  of  January  in- 
stant. Examination  taken  in  the  presence  of  Michael  Hays,  the 
plaintiff,  and  William  Halsted,  Esq.,  his  counsel,  and  of  John  L. 
N.  Stratton  and  Abraham  Browning,  Esquires,  of  counsel  with 
the  defendant. 

J.  WILSON, 
Com'r,  8fC,  for  taking  bail  and  affidavits  in 

Supreme  Court,  JV.  J. 

George  W.  Doane,  the  defendant,  being  by  me  duly  sworn  ac- 
cording to  law,  on  his  oath  saith,  in  reply  to  the  questions  pro- 
pounded to  him  by  Mr.  Halsted,  counsel  for  the  plaintiff,  as 
follows : 

42.  Question.  With  whom  was  the  general  understanding 
made,  of  which  you  have  already  spoken  ? 

Answer.  St.  Mary's  Hall,  from  the  time  of  my  assignment, 
has  been  carried  on  by  gentlemen  who  have  been  called  Commis- 
sioners, for  the  sake  of  having  a  name.  The  present  Commis- 
sioners are  Judge  Ogden,  Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaite,  Joel  W.  Con- 
diet,  and  William  Wright. 

43.  Question.  Was  the  general  understanding  then  made  with 
them  '? 

Answer.  I  would  answer  that  it  was  not  only  a  general  un- 
derstanding, but  an  informal  one,  and  it  was  made  with  some  one 
or  other  of  them,  or  with  their  predecessors. 

44.  Qnestion.  When  was  this  general  understanding  entered 
into  1 

Answer.     I  am  not  able  to  state  the  time. 

45.  Question.  In  the  provision  which  you  made  for  carrying 
on  the  College,  did  you  consider  the  Library  as  a  part  of  that 
provision  t 

Answer.     I  did,  sir. 

46.  Question.     Does  that  Library  remain  in  the  College  still  1 
Answer.     It  does. 

47.  Question.  Have  the  Trustees  of  Burlington  College  paid 
you  for  the  Library? 

Answer.     No,  sir. 

48.  Question.     To  whom  does  that  Library  now  belong  ? 
Answer.     That  is  more  than  I  can  tell.     I  decline  to  answer 

questions  which  settle  legal  rights,  and  I  don't  understand  them. 

49.  Question.  Was  that  Library  put  into  the  schedule  of  your 
property  at  the  time  you  made  your  assignment? 

Answer.     I  must  refer  to  the  record,  sir. 


139 

50.  Question.     Can  you  recollect,  or  can  you  not? 

Answer.  I  have  deelined  to  answer  as  to  matters  which  are 
on  public  accounts. 

51.  Question.  Do  you  say  that  this  matter  is  a  matter  of 
public  record  ? 

Answer.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  is  or  is  not.  I  do  not 
know  whether  the  Library  is  included  in  it  or  not,  or  whether  it 
ought  to  have  been  included  in  it  or  not.  I  will  also  state,  in 
connection  with  this,  that  I  deposited  in  that  Library,  from  time 
to  time,  books  of  my  own  for  the  use  of  the  College,  of  which, 
as  far  as  I  now  recollect,  it  being  sevfcjn  years  ago,  I  made  no 
account.  Some  of  my  friends  presented  books,  and  books  have 
come  in  from  the  general  government,  and  from  the  Smithsonian 
Institution,  and  perhaps  from  the  government  of  this  state;  and 
these  constitute  the  Library.  I  think  I  never  asked  myself  the 
question  whose  it  was. 

52.  Question.     Did  your  assignees  sell  this  Library  ? 
Answer.     I  don't  know7.     I  was  not  present  at  the  sale,  nor 

have  I  ever  seen  the  returns. 

53.  Question.  Does  the  Library  remain  in  the  College  in  the 
same  way  that  it  did  before  the  assignment  1 

Answer.     It  does. 

54.  Question.  What  is  the  amount  of  your  annual  income 
from  all  sources  ? 

Answer.  As  I  have  no  income  from  any  source,  other  than 
my  labor  or  personal  services,  and  as  that  is  expressly  excepted 
by  the  statute,  I  decline  to  answer. 

Mr.  Halsted  desires  here  to  state  that  he  does  not  assent  to 
that  construction  of  the  statute,  but  that  he  conceives  that  the  sta- 
tute makes  no  such  exception. 

Bishop  Doane  then  proceeds  to  say,  I  have  no  objection  to  sta- 
ting what  my  income  is,  though  I  don't  think  I  am  bound  to  state 
it.  The  only  available  claim  that  I  have  for  income,  is  as  the 
Rector  of  St.  Mary's  Church,  Burlington,  for  services,  seven 
hundred  dollars  per  annum,  with  the  use  of  the  parsonage. 

55.  Question.  Has  all  this  money  due  you  for  salary  been 
paid  you  by  the  Church  '{     Is  there  any  part  of  it  now  due  1 

Answer.     That  is  more  than  I  know,  sir. 

56.  Question.  What  amount  of  money  did  you  receive  last 
vear  from  all  sources,  as  near  as  vou  can  come  to  it  ?  I  don't 
ask  you  within  a  hundred  dollars,  or  five  hundred. 

Answer.  As  the  only  available  source  of  income  which  I  pos- 
sess is  stated  above,  is  the  Rectorship  of  St.  Mary's  Church,  it 
could  not  have  exceeded  the  sum  above  mentioned.  And  that 
sum  is  charged  with  the  support  of  my  mother  and  sisters. 


140 

57.  Question.  Is  this  the  whole  annual  amount  of  your  income 
since  your  assignment  ? 

Answer.  Protesting  against  the  right  to  ask  these  questions,  I 
reply,  that  this  is  the  whole  amount  of  income  I  have  received 
during  that  period,  excepting  the  payments  for  the  three  or  four 
times  specified  above. 

58.  Question.  Have  you  received  no  part  of  your  wife's  in- 
come since  your  assignment? 

Answer.  The  expenses  of  my  house  and  my  personal  expen- 
ses have  been  paid  from  her  income.  That  is  all  that  I  have 
received.  Jt 

59.  Question.  Have  you  paid  any  debts  since  your  assign- 
ment? 

Answer.  In  answer  to  that  question  I  have  only  to  say  this, 
that  I  have  stated  truly  the  amount  of  income  which  I  have  re- 
ceived. Whatever  debts  I  have  paid  have  been  paid  from  that. 
Any  other  debts  which  have  been  paid  have  been  paid  by  Mrs. 
Doane,  and  not  from  any  means  or  income  of  mine. 

60.  Question.  What  debts  have  you  paid  from  your  own  in- 
come since  the  assignment  ? 

Answer.  It  is  impossible  for  me  to  state  that.  I  don't  remem- 
ber. 

61.  Question.  Did  you  pay  a  person  by  the  name  of  Mc- 
Evoy  a  sum  of  money  since  your  assignment,  and  if  so,  how 
much  ? 

Answer.     I  have  no  recollection  of  any  such  payment,  sir. 

62.  Question.  Did  you  not  pay  to  a  man  by  the  name  of  Den- 
nis McEvoy,  who  resides  in  Burlington,  a  sum  of  money  since 
vour  assignment  ? 

Answer.  I  think  I  have  a  general  recollection  of  that.  As  far 
as  I  remember  the  circumstances,  they  are  these  ;  I  can't  speak  cer- 
tainly, for  the  facts  are  very  indistinct  in  my  mind.  As  far  as  I 
recollect  the  circumstances  are  these:  that  William  A.  Rodgers 
settled  with  him  for  a  small  sum,  and  that  the  debt  to  Mrs.  Rod- 
gers remains  unsatisfied. 

63.  Question.     Did  you  request  Rodgers  to  settle  with  him? 
Answer.     As  far  as  I  remember  Rodgers  himself  proposed  it. 

64.  Question.  Do  you  recollect  the  amount  of  his  claim 
against  you? 

Answer.     I  do  not. 

GG.  Question.     Has  any  body  paid  him  anything  for  you. 

Before  answering  this  question  Bishop  Doane  says,  I  wish  dis- 
tinctly to  record  my  protest  against  all  questions  concerning  the 
payment  of  my  debts,  as  not  authorized  by  the  statute,  any  of 
them.  And  in  any  that  I  have  answered,  or  shall  answer,  I  claim 
the  protection  of  this  protest.     And  I  claim,  moreover,  to  be  pro- 


141 

tected  in  case  of  any  erroneous  answer  in  this  connection,  by 
the  length  of  time  which  has  occurred,  and  the  great  extent  and 
complicated  character  of  my  business  transactions  before  my  as- 
signment, and  the  impossibility  of  separating  some  of  them,  from 
efforts  which  I  have  subsequently  made,  and  attempted  to  make, 
to  relieve  persons  to  whom  I  have  been  indebted,  from  pecuniary 
inconvenience  and  suffering. 

Now  in  answer  to  the  last  question,  I  reply,  my  debts  to  Wil- 
liam H.  Case,  (that  was  his  name,)  so  far  as  I  know  and  believe, 
were  included  in  the  assignment,  and  so  far  as  they  have  been 
paid,  they  have  not  been  paid  by  myself  nor  by  others  with  my 
means,  for  I  had  no  means  to  give  them. 

67.  Question.  Have  you,  or  has  any  one  for  you,  since  your 
assignment,  paid  to  Mrs.  C.  Lippincott  any  thing  for  you,  and  if 
so,  how  much? 

Answer.  I  have  paid  nothing  to  her,  and  I  do  not  know  what 
amount  has  been  paid  to  her  by  any  other  person. 

63.  Question.  Did  you  request  any  body  to  pay  any  thing  to 
her  for  vou  1 

Answer.     I  Did  not. 

69.  Question.  Did  you  pay  any  thing  since  the  assignment  to 
the  son  of  Mrs.  Lippincott? 

Answer.     I  did  not. 

70.  Question.  Did  you  request  any  one  to  pay  him  any  thing 
for  you  ? 

Answer.     I  did  not. 

71.  Question.  What  was  the  value  of  the  silver  plate  which 
you  possessed  at  the  time  of  your  assignment  ? 

Answer.  I  do  not  know.  The  appraisement  ought  to  state*  it, 
and  I  suppose  it  does. 

72.  Question.     Can  you  tell  what  the  articles  were? 
Answer.     I  cannot. 

73.  Question.  Have  you  those  articles  of  that  plate  in  posses- 
sion yet? 

Answer.     No,  I  have  not. 

74.  Question.     Was  that  plate  sold  at  the  assignees  sale  ? 

Answer.  I  was  not  present  at  the  sale,  as  I  have  answered  be- 
fore. I  take  it  for  granted  it  was  sold,  but  if  [  am  to  answer 
from  my  own  knowledge,  I  was  not  present. 

75.  Question.     Did  any  body  buy  it  for  you  ? 
Answer.     No. 

76.  Question.     Was  your  private  library  sold  by  the  assignees? 
Answer.     It  was. 

77.  Question.     Did  any  body  purchase  it  for  you  ? 
Answer.     No. 

78.  Question.     Have  you  possession  of  it  now  ? 


142 

Answer.  I  have  not  possession  of  it,  in  the  sense  in  which  I 
suppose  "  possession"  to  be  properly  used.  I  am  not  the  owner 
of  it.  The  Library  remains  in  the  house  which  I  occupy,  and  I 
have  the  use  of  it. 

79.  Question.  Does  it  remain  in  the  same  room  that  it  did  be- 
fore the  sale  was  made  ? 

Answer.     Yes. 

80.  Question.  Do  you  use  it  in  the  same  way  you  did  before 
the  sale  was  made  ? 

Answer.  Yes;  I  use  it  in  the  same  way  I  did  before  the  asr 
signment  was  made,  except  that  I  cannot  alienate  it. 

81.  Question.  What  wTas  the  value  of  that  Library  at  the 
time  of  the  assignment,  in  your  opinion  ? 

Answer.  I  never  made  any  valuation  of  it.  It  was  valued  by 
the  appraisers,  but  I  can't  tell  at  what. 

82.  Question.     Did  you  never  make  any  valuation  of  it  1 
Answer.     I  never  made  anv  valuation  of  it. 

83.  Question.  Did  you  never  give  it  in  pledge  as  payment  for 
any  money  ? 

Answer.  To  obtain  money  for  carrying  on  St.  Mary's  Hall, 
at  the  time  of  great  pressure,  I  gave  it  in  pledge,  but  I  do  not  re- 
member for  what  sum. 

84.  Question.     To  whom  did  you  give  it  in  (charge  or)  pledge? 

Answer.  I  think  that  the  transaction  was  with  Governor  Pen- 
nington, as  the  Executor  of  an  estate.  I  think  that  there  was 
some  further  security  by  the  individual  responsibility  of  others  in 
addition  to  that,  but  I  can't  recollect,  for  it  is  now  some  ten  or 
twelve  years  ago.  There  was  never  any  other  pledge  of  it  since 
then,  to  any  body  else,  that  I  remember. 

85.  Question.  Who  purchased  this  Library  at  the  assignees 
sale  ? 

Answer.     Miss  Caroline  Watson. 

86.  Question.     Is  she  still  the  owner  of  it? 
Answer.     She  is  not. 

87.  Question.     Who  is  the  owner  of  it  now  ? 
Answer.     Mrs.  Sarah  P.  Cleveland. 

88.  Question.  Is  there  any  understanding  between  you  and 
her  that  you  are  to  redeem  it. 

Answer.     No;  none  whatever. 

89.  Question.  Were  the  philosophical  and  chemical  appara- 
tus which  were  in  the  College  put  into  the  schedule  of  your  pro- 
perty at  the  time  you  made  your  assignment? 

Answer.     That  is  more  than  I  can  tell.     The  deed  is  upon  re 
cord. 

90.  Question.     Were  they  sold  by  the  assignees  ? 
Answer.     That  I  do  not  know.     I  was  not  at  the  sale* 


148 

91.  Question.     Do  they  remain  in  the  College  still  t 
Answer.     They  do. 

92.  Question.  Do  you  recollect  what  you  paid  for  that  philo- 
sophical apparatus,  or  the  chemical,  or  both? 

Jlnswer.  I  do  not.  They  were  bought  at  different  times,  and 
under  different  circumstances.     It  is  some  years  ago. 

93.  Question.  Can  you  give  any  general  opinion  of  their 
value  ? 

Answer.     I  cannot. 

94.  Question.  Have  you  paid  R.  J.  Germain  any  part  of  what 
you  owed  him  at  the  time  of  your  assignment  ? 

Answer.     I  have  not. 

95.  Question.     Do  you  owe  him  any  thing  now  ? 

Answer.  1  do  not  owe  him  anything.  Mr.  Germain,  as  far 
as  I  know  or  believe,  came  in  under  the  assignment  and  I  re- 
ceived his  dividend,  and  that,  I  am  advised  by  counsel,  extin- 
guishes his  debt. 

9G.  Question.  Do  you  know  that  Mr.  Germain  presented  the 
whole  of  his  claim  to  the  assignees? 

Answer.     I  do  not  know  that  he  did,  but  I  believe  he  did. 

97.  Question.  Do  you  recollect  what  was  the  amount  of  his 
claim  against  you? 

Answer.     I  do  not. 

98.  Question  Have  you  any  stock  in  any  Bank  or  Insurance 
Company,  or  other  institution? 

Answer.     I  have  not. 


F  1. 


COPY  OF  THE  MEMORIAL  OF  MICHAEL  HAYS  TO 
THE  DIOCESAN  CONVENTION  OF  NEW  JERSEY. 

To  the  Honorable  the  members  of  the  Convention  of  the  Pro- 
testant Episcopal  Church  of  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  at  the 
city  of  Burlington  assembled  : 

The  petition  of  the  subscriber  respectfully  sheweth,  That 
your  petitioner  having  suffered  great  wrong  and  losses,  to  a  very 
great  extent,  by  indorsing  and  loaning  money  to  the  Rev.  George 
VV.  Doane,  he  (the  said  Doane)  representing  to  your  petitioner, 
at  the  different  times  of  procuring  said  loans  and  indorsements, 
that  your  petitioner  was  perfectly  safe  in  so  doing,  and  that  he 
should  suffer  no  loss  thereby  ;  yet,  at  the  same  time,  the  said  G. 
W.  Doane  well  knowing  that  he  (the  said  Doane)  was,  at  that 
time,  insolvent  and  unable  to  pay  his  indebtedness;  but  contriving 


144 

and  wrongfully  and  unjustly  intending  to  injure  and  bring  to  great 
loss  your  petitioner;  and  he  (the  said  Doane)  did,  at  divers  times, 
wrongfully  represent  to  your  petitioner  his  ability  to  pay  his  in- 
debtedness, thereby  wrongfully  and  unjustly  through  such  false 
representations,  induce  your  petitioner  to  loan  money,  and  also 
to  indorse  for  the  said  G.  VV.  Doane  to  a  large  amount,  and  which 
said  large  amount, — to  wit,  the  amount  of  twenty-three  thousand 
dollars,  your  petitioner  has  been  compelled  to  pay;  and  your  pe- 
titioner further  represents,  that  the  said  G.  VV.  Doane  did  stipu- 
late that  if  your  petitioner  would  pay  the  aforesaid  amount  of 
money  without  any  contested  suit  at  law,  then  he  (the  said  G.  W. 
Doane)  would,  upon  such  settlement,  remunerate  your  petitioner 
to  the  amount  herein  set  forth  and  made  known  to  your  honorable 
body,  you  will  take  such  action  on  the  same  as  to  you  shall  seem 
proper  and  right,  and  your  petitioner,  as  in  dutv  bound,  will  ever 
pray.  MICHAEL  HAYS. 

State  of  New  Jersey.  > 

/  ss 
Burlington  county,      ) 

Michael  Hays,  the  petitioner  above  named,  being  duly  sworn 
according  to  law,  doth  depose  and  say  that  the  matters  and  things 
set  forth  in  the  foregoing  petition  are  true  to  the  best  of  his 
knowledge.  MICHAEL  HAYS. 

Sworn  and  subscribed  this  25th  day  of  May*  1851, 

before  me,  one  of  the  justices  of  the  peace   of 

said  county. 

Samuel  W.  Earl. 

The  foregoing  affidavit  speaks  of  the  amount  that  Mr.  Hays 
had  been  compelled  at  that  time  to  pay.  The  following  letter  of 
Mr.  Hays  to  Bishop  Doane,  speaks  of  the  loan  of  three  thousand 
dollars,  which  was  a  part  of  the  loan  negotiated  in  the  fifty  thou- 
sand dollars  mortgage,  and  it  makes  the  Bishop's  indebtedness  to 
Mr.  Hays  thirty  thousand  dollars,  instead  of  twenty-eight  thou- 
sand. 


F2. 

February  13,  1851. 
Sir  : 

Y'ours  of  the  11th  instant  is  before  me  and  its  contents  read, 
by  which  I  am  very  much  disappointed,  and  not  a  little  surprised, 
that  you  should  ask  of  me  a  further  indulgence  in  the  payment  of 
the  money  so  long  due  me,  and  so  much  needed  by  me.  I  had 
hoped,  with  all  the  patience  and  forbearance  that  1  have  exer- 
cised towards  you,  I  might  now  have  expected  better  things  towards 


145 

me,  than  to  ask  me  to  wait  three  months  longer,  after  waiting  as 
long  as  I  have,  and  after  my  paying  as  much  money  as  1  have 
been  compelled  to  pay  for  you.  Nearly  forty  years  of  my  earn- 
ings, by  hard  labor,  has  been  taken  from  me,  amounting  to  twen- 
ty-five thousand  dollars,  or  upwards,  (including  the  loan,)  which 
1  consider  I  was  completely  swindled  out  of;  of  which  you  and 
others  shall  hear  more  about  by  and  by.  In  your  inventory,  or 
schedule  of  debts,  to  the  assignees,  according  to  pamphlet  report, 
which  I  suppose  was  taken  for  records,  you  put  down  your  in- 
debtedness to  me  at  fifteen  thousand  dollars,  when  it  was  double 
that  sum;  and  I  do  not  know  how  you  could  not  have  known  it, 
when  the  notes  protested  amounted  to  twenty-nine  thousand  and 
the  loan  wTas  three  thousand.  All  these  things  I  have  borne  pa- 
ticntlv,  but  the  time  has   now  arrived   when  forbearance  would 

m 

cease  to  be  a  virtue;  I  therefore  inform  you  that  the  indulgence 
asked  for  cannot  be  granted,  although  it  may  be  longer  before  I 
shall  be  able  to  obtain  anything,  if  ever,  but  I  shall  have  the  sat- 
isfaction of  saying  to  my  friends,  I  have  done  my  duty  towards 
trying  to  get  what  is  justly  and  honestly  due  me. 

The  course  I  shall  pursue  is  not   necessary  to   state,  as  I  shall 
act  advisedlv.  Your  obedient  serv't, 

MICHAEL  HAYS. 

The  foregoing  letter,  in  answer  to  the  following  letter  of  Bishop 
Doane,  viz  ; 


F3. 

Riversjde,  Feb.  11,  1851. 
Mv  Dear  FrSf.nd: 

I  applied  to  the  gentlemen  for  aid,  in  the  matter,  of  which  I 
spoke  to  you.  They  would  advance  the  1 1,000,  but  that  they 
are  just  now  straitened.  It  will  be  paid,  however,  at  the  begin- 
ning of  May;  and  I  must  ask  your  indulgence  until  then.  You 
can  count  on  it,  then,  with  certainty;  say,  three  months  from  this 
date.  Very  faithfully  vour  friend, 

G.  VV.  DOANE. 


G: 

See  Post  Letter,  R,  the  affidavit  of  Joseph  Deacon. 


K 


146 

H. 

Philadelphia,  June  21st,  1842. 
Rt.  Rev.  G.  W.  Doane,  D.  D.,  L.  L.  D. 

Dear  Bishop :  Receiving,  as  I  did,  a  notice  of  the  sitting  of  the 
Committee  of  the  Church,  in  New  Jersey,  to  examine  charges 
affecting  you,  I  write  lo  you,  lest  my  non-appearance  before  them 
should  be  liable  to  any  unjust  construction.  I  will  try  to  state 
the  facts  as  I  understand  them,  without  argument  or  inference. 
You  purchased  some  books  of  me  lor  your  parish  library,  amount- 
ing altogether,  I  think,  to  about  fifty  dollars.  You  requested  me 
to  charge  them  to  you  ;  which  1  was  ready  enough  lo  do.  1 
think  it  was  something  like  a  year  before  your  assignment.  When 
that  event  was  published,  remembering  that  the  books  were  for 
the  parish  library,  and  thinking  perhaps  the  Church  was  bound 
to  pay  for  them,  I  wrote  to  Mr.  Milnor,  Treasurer,  as  I  under- 
stood, of  the  vestry.  I  did  this,  not  willing  at  the  time  to  add  to 
your  troubles  by  calling  your  attention  to  it.  Mr.  Milnor  replied, 
in  substance,  that  the  money  had  been  put  in  your  hands  to  pur- 
chase the  books,  and  the  books  had  been  placed  in  the  library  for 
the  same ;  saying  he  thought  the  facts  had  passed  from  your 
mind,  and  desiring  me  to  write  to  you,  which  I  did  soon  after,  but 
received  no  reply  from  you,  and  there  the  matter  has  rested.  I 
knew  you  had  many  cares  and  thought  it  quite  probable  you  had  for- 
gotten the  circumstance.  I  am  owing  you  now,  and  as  you  have 
requested  me  to  consider  the  debt  paid,  and  said  it  had  been  your 
wish  and  intention  so  to  pay  it,  I  have  no  farther  claim  against 
you,  and  feel  entirely  satisfied  with  the  result.  Hoping  that  you 
may  thus  rise  out  of  all  your  difficulties  and  trials, 

I  am,  verv  truly,  your  friend, 

II.  HOOKER. 


7. 

Samuel  R.  Cummere  to  ) 

Garret  D.  VVall  axd  others.    J 

This  indenture,  made  this  first  day  of  December,  in  the  year  of 
our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  thirty-six,  between 
Samuel  R.  Gummere,  and  Elizabeth  D.,  his  wife,  of  the  city  and 
county  of  Burlington,  state  of  New  Jersey,  party  of  the  first  part, 
and  Garret  D.  Wall,  of  the  same  place,  Henry  C.  Carey,  and 
William  J.  Watson,  of  the  city  of  Philadelphia,  in  the  state  of 
Pennsylvania,  party  of  the  second  part,  wiinesseth,  that  the  said 
party  of  the  first  part,  for  and  in  consideration  of  the  sum  of  six- 


147 

teen  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  good  and  lawful  money  of  the 
United  States,  to  the  said  party  of  the  first  part,  in  hand  well  and 
truly  paid,  the  receipt  whereof  they,  the  said  party  of  the  first 
part,  do  hereby  acknowledge,  have  granted,  bargained,  sold, 
aliened,  enfeoffed,  released,  conveyed  and  confirmed,  and  by  these 
presenis  do  grant,  bargain,  sell,  alien,  enfeoff,  release,  convey  and 
confirm  unto  the  said  parly  of  the  second  part,  their  heirs  and 
assigns  forever:  All  the  following  described  lots  or  parcels  of 
land,  situate  lying  and  being  in  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington, 
and  state  of  New  Jersey  aforesaid. 

(Here  follows  a  description  of  four  lots  which  compose  the 
property  called  St.  Mary's  Hall.) 

Then  follows  a  warranty  against  all  persons  except  Griffith 
Evans  and  those  claiming  under  him,  by  virtue  of  a  certain 
mortgage  given  by  the  said  party  of  the  first  part  to  the  said 
Griffith  Evans,  to  secure  the  payment  of  eight  thousand  dol- 
lars, bearing  date  the  first  day  of  April,  eighteen  hundred 
and  twenty-nine  :  And  except  by  George  Cummings  and  those 
claiming  under  him,  by  virtue  of  a  certain  mortgage,  given 
by  the  said  party  of  the  first  part,  to  secure  the  payment  of  one 
thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  and  bearing  date  on  the  twenty- 
second  day  of  July,  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty.  And  that  the 
said  premises  are  free  and  clear,  and  freely  and  clearly  acquitted 
and  discharged  of,  and  from  all  former  mortgages,  judgments 
execu'ions  and  of  and  from  all  other  incumbrances  whatever,  ex- 
cept the  two  above  recited  mortgages  given  by  the  said  party  of 
the  first  part,  to  Griffith  Evans  and  George  Cummings,  and  bear- 
ing date  as  aforesaid.  And  lastly,  that  he,  the  saiJ  party  of  the  first 
part,  and  his  heirs,  all  and  singular,  the  said  four  above  described 
lots  or  parcels  of  land,  hereditaments  and  premises  hereby  granted, 
with  the  appurtenances,  unto  the  said  party  of  the  second  part, 
their  heirs  and  assigns,  and  against  them,  the  said  party  of  the 
first  part,  and  against  all  and  every  other  person  or  persons  whom- 
soever, claiming  or  to  claim  the  same,  except  by  or  under  the 
two  above  recited  mortgages  to  Griffith  Evans  and  George  Cum- 
mings as  aforesaid,  shall  and  will  warrant  and  forever  defend. 

In  witness  whereof  the  said  party  of  the  first  part  have  here- 
unto set  their  hands  and  seals  the  dav  and  year  first  above  written. 

SAML.  It.  GUMMERR  [L.  s] 

ELIZABETH  D.  GUM.MERE.  [l  s.] 
Signed,  sealed  and  delivered  ) 
in  presence  of  jj 

Christian  Earzelf.rf. 

Acknowledged  before  Christian  Earzelerc,  Mav,  1837. 

Recorded  November  '-27 th,  A.  D.,  1839. 

JOS.  S.  READ,  Uerk. 


148 

K. 

Garret  D.  Wall  and  others 

to 

George  W.  Doaxe. 

This  Indenture,  made  the  twelfth  day  of  March,  in  the  year  of 
our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-seven,  between 
Garret  D.  Wall,  of  the  city  of  Burlington  and  State  of  New  Jer- 
sey, Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  of  the  city  of  Phil- 
adelphia and  State  of  Pennsylvania,  parties  of  the  first  part,  and 
the  Right  Reverend  George  W.  Doane,  L.  L.  D.,  of  the  city  of 
Burlington  and  State  aforesaid,  party  of  the  second  part,  Wit- 
nesseth,  that  whereas,  by  an  indenture  of  bargain  and  sale,  bear- 
ing date  the  first  day  of  December,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one 
thousand  ei^ht  hundred  and  thirtv-six,  made  between  Samuel  It. 
Gum  mere  and  Elizabeth  D.  his  wife,  of  the  one  part,  and  the  said 
Garret  D.  Wall,  of  the  city  of  Burlington,  and  Henry  G.  Carey 
and  William  J.  Watson,  of  the  city  of  Philadelphia,  of  the  other 
part,  they,  the  said  Samuel  R.  Gummere  and  Elizabeth  D.  his 
wife,  for  and  in  consideration  of  the  sum  of  sixteen  thousand  five 
hundred  dollars  therein  mentioned,  to  be  paid  to  them  by  the  said 
Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  did 
grant,  bargain,  sell,  alien,  enfeoff,  release,  convey  and  confirm 
unto  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J. 
Watson  all  the  following  described  tracts  and  lots  of  land,  situate, 
lying  and  being  in  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington  and  State  of 
New  Jersey. 

The  first  lot  beginning  at  the  corner  of  the  fence,  as  it  now 
stands,  now  being  a  corner  of  Fourth  aud  Pearl  streets,  and  rvn* 
thence  in  the  line  of  Pearl  street  westward  seventy-three  feet  to 
the  line  of  lot  No.  2,  formerly  m  the  tenure  of  James  Verree  ; 
thence  north- westwardly  by  line  dividing  lot  No.  2  from  this  lot 
three  hundred  and  sixtv-srx  feet;  thence  running  an  eastwardlv 
course  twenty-three  feet  along  the  garden  fence  on  said  lot  for  a 
corner  where  formerly  stood  three  peach  trees  ;  thence  north- 
wardly a  direct  course  down  to  low  water  on  Delaware  river: 
thence  eastwardlv  fifty  feet  along  said  river,  and  thence  back 
southwardly  in  a  direct  line  by  Fourth  street  to  the  corner  on 
Pearl  street  aforesaid  to  the  place  of  beginning,  be  the  quantity 
within  said  bounds  what  it  may.  The  second  lot,  beginning  at  a 
stone  fixed  for  a  corner  on  the  west  side  of  Pearl  street  seventy- 
five  links  to  the  westward  of  the  south-east  corner  of  a  lot,  and 
four  feet  and  a  half  to  ihe  westward  of  the  trunks  of  the  second 
row  of  apple  trees,  counting  westward  from  the  east  side  of  the 
lots  then  belonging  to  Sarah  Lee;  thence  from  said  stone  running 
along  said  Pearl  street  south  seventy-two  degrees  west  two  chains 


149 

and  eleven  links  to  the  corner  of  the  lot  sold  by  the  executors  of 
James  Verree  to  George  Eyre  and  Isaac  Conover ;  thence  along 
the  line  of  the  same  about  north   twelve  degrees  and  fifteen  min- 
utes west  ten  chains  and  ninety-three  links  to  the  river  Delaware 
at  low  water  mark ;  thence  bounded  up  the  said  river  about  one 
chain  and  seventv  links  until  a  course   near  about  south,  fourteen 
degrees  and  a  quarter  east,  just  clearing  the  south-west  corner  of 
the  house  in  which   Sarah  Lee  formerly  lived,  and  running  four 
and  a  half  feet  west  from   the  bodies  or  trunks  of  the  said  rows 
of  apple  trees,  distance  ten  chains  and  eighty-five  links,  will  strike 
the  beginning  corner,  containing  two  acres   and  ten   perches,  or 
thereabouts.     The  third  lot,  beginning  on  the  north  side  of  Pearl 
street  at  John  Andrews  Barbarous  corner,  (formerly,)  and  runs 
in  said  Barbarous's  line  north  fifteen  degrees  and  twenty  minutes 
west  three  hundred  and  sixty-six  feet  to  his  corner,  standing  where 
formerly  was  a  row  of  peach  trees ;  then  turning  at  right  angles 
eastward  twenty-three  feet  to  said  Barbarous  corner;  then  north 
fifteen  degrees  and   twenty  minutes  west  in  said  Barbarous's  line 
to  low  water  mark  on  the  Delaware ;  then  down   the   Delaware 
to  the  lot  late  John  Mannington's ;  thence   along   the  line  of  said 
lot  about   south   twelve   degrees  and   three  quarters  east  to  said 
Pearl  street;  and  then  eastward  along  Pearl  street  seventy-four 
feet  to  the  place  of  beginning.     The  fourth  lot,  beginning  by  the 
River  Delaware  at  low  water  mark,  corner  to  a  lot  of  land  con- 
veyed  to  Sarah  Lee  formerly,  and   since  belonging  to   Samuel 
Robbins,  and  runs  from  thence  bv  the  same  lot  south  twelve  de- 
grees  and  fifteen  minutes  east  across  the  middle  of  a  well  of  wa- 
ter, ten  chains,  more  or  less,  to  a  stone  by  the  north  side  of  Pearl 
street ;  thence  along  Pearl  street   north  seventy-two  degrees  east 
one  chain   and  twelve   links  to  a  stone,  corner  to  land  formerly 
belonging  to  James  Verree,  by  which  it  runs  north  twelve  degrees 
and  fifteen  minutes  west  ten  chains  to  the  said   river  Delaware; 
thence  it  is  bounded  down  the  same,  being  in  a  direct  line  one 
chain  and  twelve  links  to  the  place  of  beginning,  containing  one 
acre  and  fourteen  perches;  together  with   all  and   singular  the 
buildings,  improvements,  ways,  woods,  waters,    water  courses, 
righls,  liberties,  privileges,  hereditaments  and   appurtenances  to 
the  same  belonging,  or  in  any  wise  appertaining,  and  the  rever- 
sion and  reversions,  remainder  and   remainders,  rents,  issues  and 
profits  thereof,  and  every  part  and   parcel  thereof;  and   also   all 
the  estate,  right,  title,  interest,  property,  claim  and  demands  what- 
soever, both  in  law  and  equity,  of  the   said  Samuel  R.  Gummere 
and  Elizabeth  D.  his  wife,  of,  in   and   to  the   same,   subject  to  a 
mortgage  given  by  the  said   Samuel  R.  Gummere  and  Elizabeth 
D.  his  wife,  to  Griffith  Evans,  bearing  date  the  first  dav  of  April, 
in  trie  year  01  our  Lord  one  tbr%,,,=or,d  oinrht  hnnHred  and  twenty- 


150 

nine,  to  secure  the  payment  of  eight  thousand  dollars;  and  also 
to  a  certain  other  mortgage,  bearing  date  on  the  twenty- second 
day  of  July,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  thirty,  and  given  by  the  said  Samuel  R.  Gummere  and  Eliza- 
beth D.  his  wife,  to  one  George  Cummings,  to  secure  the  payment 
of  one  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  with  interest  on  the  said  re- 
spective sums.  To  have  and  to  hold  the  said  described  heredita- 
ments and  premises  thereby  granted,  and  every  part  and  parcel 
thereof,  with  the  appurtenances,  unto  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall, 
Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  as  joint  tenants  and  not 
as  tenants  in  common,  and  the  survivor  and  survivors  of  them, 
their  and  his  asigns,  to  the  only  proper  use,  benefit  and  behoof  of 
the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Wat- 
son, and  the  survivor  and  survivors  of  their  and  his  heirs  and  as- 
signs, forever,  as  joint  tenants  aad  not  as  tenants  in  common. 

And  whereas,  further,  the  said  Right  Reverend  George  W. 
J3oane,  L.  L.  D.,  by  his  indenture,  bearing  date  the  first  day  of 
September,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  thirty-eight,  and  made  between  the  said  George  W.  Doane 
of  the  one  part,  and  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey 
and  William  J.  Watson  of  the  other  part,  for  the  consideration 
in  the  said  deed  mentioned,  bargain,  sell,  assign,  transfer,  set  over 
and  deliver  to  the  said  Garret  JJ.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  Wil- 
liam J.  Watson  the  several  articles  of  household  and  kitchen  fur- 
niture, books,  instruments  and  other  personal  goods  and  chattels 
mentioned  and  described  in  the  said  deed,  to  Have  and  to  Hold 
to  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Wat- 
son, their  and  the  survivor  of  their  executors,  administrators  and 
assigns,  as  joint  tenants  and  not  as  tenants  in  common,  as  by  the 
said  several  deeds,  reference  being  thereto  respectively  had,  will 
more  fully  and  at  large  appear.  And  whereas,  further,  the  said 
Garret  D.  Waif,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  on  the 
first  flay  of  September,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand 
dght  hundred  and  ihirtv-cieht,  by  a  declaration  under  their  re- 
spective  hands  and  seals,  acknowledge,  testify  and  declare,  that 
the  consideration  money  mentioned  in  the  said  deeds  was  paid  by 
the  several  persons  hereinafter  mentioned,  as  follows,  to  wit  :  The 
said  George  W.  Doane,  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey,  Wil- 
liam J.  Watson,  and  Hannah  Carr,  each  the  sum  of  one  thousand 
dollars;  and  Mary  Maree,  Edward  Harris,  James  Sterling,  and 
Nathan  Dunn,  each  the  sum  of  two  hundred  dollars;  and  Susan 
V.  Bradford,  Caroline  Watson,  Christiana  Lippincott,  Joseph  As- 
kews,  Joel  W.  Condit,  Hanford  Smith,  John  Potter,  John  T.  New- 
ton, Nathan  B.  Warren,  Sarah  Perkins,  Catherine  Clark,  William 
Foster,  Harriet  J.  Barren,  Joseph  Witham,  Jonathan  f>.  Spencer, 
James  Grinnel,  Stephen  Warren,  Esther  Cannon,  Lucretia  Clarke* 


151 

William  M'llvaine,  Margaret  M'llvaine,  Mary  M'llvaine,  Sarah 
L.  Keene,  Margaret  McCall,  Elizabeth  Swift,'  Mary  Swift,  Ben- 
jamin W.  Richards,  Phebe  Warren,  Lvdia  Brooks,  Davis  S.  Jones, 
Samuel  Rogers,  Thomas  J.  Wharton,  and  Peter  G.  Stuyvesant, 
each  the  sum  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars ;  and  Elizabeth 
Slok  the  sum  of  seven  hundred  and  fifty  dollars;  who  severally 
subscribed  the  respective  sums  for  the  purpose  of  estabhshing  a 
seminary  or  institution  on  said  premises,  called  St.  Mary's  Hall, 
as  will  appear  by  a  certificate  of  stock,  issued  and  signed  by  the 
said  George  W.  Doane,  to  the  said  persons  above  named  respec- 
tively, bearing  date  as  by  reference  to  the  same  will  appear;  and 
whereas,  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey,  did  further, 
by  the  same  declaration,  bearing  date  and  signed  and  sealed  as 
aforesaid,  acknowledge  and  declare  that  they  held,  and  would 
continue  to  hold,  the  said  several  tracts  of  land  and  goods  and 
chattels  in  trust.  First,  to  pay  the  said  mortgages  secured  there- 
on; and  secondly,  to  reimburse  and  pay  them  for  all  costs,  char- 
ges and  expenses  accrued  in  the  execution  of  said  trust.  Third, 
to  pay  the  several  shareholders  of  stock,  or  their  assignees,  there- 
inbefore named,  on  the  sums  advanced,  as  may  appear  by  their 
respective  certificates  of  stock,  issued  and  signed  by  the  said 
George  W.  Doane,  and  interest  on  the  said  sum  mentioned  there- 
in, at  the  rate  of  six  per  centum  per  annum,  from  the  date  of  the 
said  certificates  respectively  ;  and  fourthly,  for  the  purpose  of 
paying  the  principal  mentioned  in  the  said  certificate  of  stock,  to 
the  stockholders  above  named,  or  their  respective  executors,  ad- 
ministrators or  assigns,  under  the  direction  of  a  board  of  trus- 
tees, to  consist  of  seven,  to  be  nominated  by  the  Bishop  of  the 
Diocese  of  New  Jersey,  and  to  be  approved  and  appointed  by 
such  of  the  shareholders  aforesaid,  their  executors,  administra- 
tors or  assigns,  as  shall  attend  at  St.  Mary's  Hall,  on  ten  days 
notice  from  the  said  Bishop;  and  all  vacancies  to  be  supplied  in 
the  same  manner.  And  the  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  of  New  Jer- 
sey is  at  all  times  to  be  one  of  the  said  seven  trustees,  and  a  offi- 
cer President,  and  the  said  board  of  trustees  at  all  times  to  have 
the  control  and  management,  as  well  of  the  said  trust  property, 
real  and  personal,  as  of  the  said  school,  to  be  called  St.  Mary's 
Hall,  and  to  appoint  all  teachers  and  other  proper  persons ;  to 
make  bye-laws  and  other  proper  regulations  for  the  purpose  of 
carrying  on  the  same  ;  and  all  profits,  after  paying  the  interest 
on  the  said  stock  and  mortgages,  to  be  applied,  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  board  of  trustees,  either  for  the  enlargement  and  im- 
provement of  the  institution  aforesaid,  or  for  the  repayment  of  the 
principal,  as  the  said  board  shall  deem  advisable  ;  and  in  case  of 
the  enlargement  or  any  improvement  of  the  institution,  the  same 
trust  being  declared  to  be  applied  and  extended  to  such  enlarge- 


152 

ment,  or  improvement,  or  addition,  to  the  said  real  and  personal 
estate,  and  in  case  of  the  payment  of  the  whole  or  any  part  of 
the  principal  advanced,  such  repayment   to  rest  protanto  all  the 
interest  of  the  shareholder  or  shareholders  so  paid  off,  in  the  said 
George  W.  Doane,  who  is  aforesaid,  to   become  substituted   as 
the  owner  thereof  in   lieu  of  said   stockholder  or  stockholders, 
and   whenever   from  the   profits  of  the   institution  in   any  other 
manner  the  stockholders  shall  be  reimbursed   the  amount  of  their 
certificates,  with  interest,  then  in  that  case  the  said  George  W. 
Doane,  his  heirs  and  assigns,  to  become  entitled  to  the  whole  pro- 
perty before  mentioned,  real  and  personal,  and  that  the  holders  of 
the  said  shares  are  bound  to  receive  the   payment  of  the  capital 
in  such  sums  and  at  such  times  as  the  board  of  trustees   shall   di- 
rect;  and  they  are  to  be  entitled,  when  two  or  more  applications 
for  admission  to  the  said  school  are  made   at  the  same  time,  to  a 
preference  for  the  pupils  sent  by  them,  it  being  expressly  understood 
and  declared  that  neither  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey 
and  William  J.    Watson,  trustees  therein   named,  nor   the  said 
shareholders,  are  to  be  considered    as   partners  engaged  in   any 
partnership  transaction,  or  to  be  in  any  way  or  manner  liable  for 
the  debts  or  responsibilities  of  the  said   institution,  or  to  be  enti- 
tled to   any  of  the   profits  thereof;  and  whereas,  it  is  further  set 
forth  in   the   said  declaration,  that  the  said    parties  signing   and 
sealing  the  same   as  aforesaid,  do  further  acknowledge  and  de- 
clare, that  for  the  purpose  of  seeming  the  sums  advanced  by  the 
said  several  stockholders,  as  appears  by  the  certificates  of  stock 
to  them  respectively  issued  and  signed  by  the  said  George  W. 
Doane,  with  interest    aforesaid,  they  and  each  of  the  said   share- 
holders,  their  executors,  administrators   and   assigns,  are  to   be 
considered  as  mortgagees  of  the   said   real   and   personal   estate, 
and   that  whenever  a   majority  of  them   in  interest  shall    refuse, 
by  writing,  signed  by  them,  a  sale  of  the   said    personal  and  real 
estate,   or  any  part  thereof,  that   ihey  the  said   Garret  D.  Wall, 
Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  or  the   survivor  or  sur- 
vivors of  them,  will  sell  the  same  in  the  same  manner  as  the  laws 
of  New  Jersey  may  prescribe  for   the   sale  of  mortgaged  premi- 
ses, and  apply  the  proceeds  thereof  to  the   payment,  first,  of  the 
mortgages   herein   mentioned,  secondly,  of  the   expenses  of  such 
sale,  and  thirdly,  to  pay  the   said   shareholders  ihe  whole  amount 
of  the  sale  of  their  certificates,  if  the  same  will   so  far  extend, 
and  if  not  to  divide  the  proceeds  equally  and  rateably.     And  the 
said  parties  in  the  said   declaration   do  further  acknowledge  and 
declare,  that  whenever  from  the  profits  of  the  said  institution,  or 
in  any  other  manner,  the   said  stockholders  shall    be  repaid  and 
reimbursed  their  advances  as  therein   before   stipulated,  and  the 
said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and   William  J.  Watson, 


153 

or  the  survivor  or  survivors,  his  heirs,  executors  and  administra- 
tors, would  at  the  proper  costs  and  charges  of  the  said  George 
W.  Doane,  and  his  heirs,  executors,  administrators  and  assigns, 
upon  his  or  their  request,  by  good  assurances  and  conveyances  in 
the  law,  convey,  assign  and  transfer  the  said  several  tracts  of 
land,  goods  and  chattels,  to  the  said  George  VV.  Doane,  his  heirs, 
executors,  administrators  or  assigns,  or  such  other  person  or  per- 
sons as  he  or  they  should  nominate,  direct  or  appoint. 

And  whereas,  the  stockholders  named  in  the  declaration  of  trust 
hereinbefore  recited,  have  been  reimbursed   and  repaid  their  sev- 
eral and  respective   advances,  as  stipulated    and    provided  for  in 
the  said  declaration,  and    the   said    George  VV.  Doane    hath  paid 
oft*  and  fully  discharged  the  same,  and  delivered  to  us,  Garret  D. 
Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey    and    William   J.  Watson,  all    the   certifi- 
cates of  stock  issued    and   signed  by  him,  therein  mentioned  and 
described,  whereby  the  uses,  purposes,  objects  and  interests  of  the 
said  declaration  of  trust,  and  of  the  said  deed    made   to  the  said 
Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Gary  and  William  J.  Watson,  by  Sam- 
uel R.  Gummere  and    Elizabeth  D.  his  wife,  have   been   executed 
and  accomplished.     Now  this  indenture  witnessed],  that  the  said 
Garret   D.  Wall,   Henry   C.   Carey   and    William  J.  Watson,  the 
party  of  the  first  part,  in  pursuance  of  the   true  intent  and  mean- 
ing of  the  said  declaration  of  trust,  and    also   for  and  in  conside- 
ration of  the  sum  of  one  dollar,  to  them  in  hand  paid  by  the  said 
George  W.  Doane,  before  the  sealing  and  delivery  hereof,  the  re- 
ceipt  whereof  they  hereby   acknowledge   and    themselves   to    be 
therewith  fully   satisfied,   have  given,   granted,   bargained,  sold, 
aliened,  enfeoffed,  released,  conveyed  and  confirmed,  and  bv  these 
presents  do   give,  grant,  bargain,  sell,  alien,  enfeoff",  release,  con- 
vey and  confirm  unto   the   said   George  W .  Doane,  his  heirs  and 
assigns,  all  and  singular  the  houses,  lots,  lands  and  premises  here- 
inbefore described    and   mentioned   in   the  deed  made  by  the  said 
Samuel  li.  Gummere   and  Elizabeth  D.  his  wife,  to  the  said  Gar- 
ret D.  Wall,   Henry  C.  Carey   and    William   J.  Watson,   bearing 
dale  the  first  day  of  December,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  thirty-six.     Together  with   all  and  singu- 
lar  the   buildings,    improvements,  woods,  waters,  water  courses, 
rights,  liberties,  privileges,   hereditaments  and    appurtenances   to 
the  same  belonging  or  in  any  wise   appertaining,  and   the   rever-  ' 
sions  and  remainders,  rents,  issues  and  profits  thereof,  and  of  ev- 
ery part  thereof,  and    also   all  the  estate,  right,  title,  interest,  use, 
property,  claim  and  demand  whatsoever,  both  in   law  and  equity, 
of  them  and  each  of  them,  the  said  party  of  the  first  part,  in  and 
to  the  same.     And  also,  for  and  in  consideration  aforesaid,  ihey, 
the  party  of  the  first  part,  have  assigned,  transferred  and  set  over, 
and  by  these  presents  do  assign,  transfer  and   set  over  unto  the 


154 

snid  George  W.  Doane,  his  heirs,  executors,  administrators  and 
assigns,  all  and  singular  the  several  articles  of  household  and 
kitchen  furniture,  books,  instruments  and  oilier  personal  goods 
and  chattels  mentioned  and  described  in  the  said  deed  made  by 
the  said  George  W.  Doane  to  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C. 
Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  bearing  date  the  first  day  of  Sep- 
tember, in  the  vear  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
thirty-eight.  To  have  and  to  hold  all  and  singular  the  said  houses, 
lots,  lands,  hereditaments,  articles  of  household  furniture,  books, 
instruments  and  other  personal  goods,  chattels  and  premises,  with 
all  and  singular  the  appurtenances  to  the  same  belonging  or  in 
any  wise  appertaining,  unto  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  his  heirs, 
executors,  administrators  and  assigns,  to  the  only  proper  use,  ben- 
efit and  behoof  of  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  his  heirs,  execu- 
tors, administrators  and  assigns  forever,  subject  nevertheless  to 
the  mortgages  mentioned  and  referred  to  in  the  first  mentioned 
deed  made  by  the  said  Samuel  II.  Gummere  and  Elizabeth  D. 
his  wife,  to  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Hcnrv  C.  Carev  and  Wil- 
liam  J.  Watson,  hereinbefore  mentioned,  or  so  much  thereof  as 
may  remain  duo  and  unpaid,  and  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry 

C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  party  aforesaid  of  the  first 
part,  and  each  of  them,  do  covenant  and  agree  with  the  said 
George  W.  Doane,  his  heirs,  executors,  administrators  and  as- 
signs, that  thev  have  not,  nor  hath  either  of  them,  done  or  committ- 
ed anv  act,  matter  or  thing  to  alter,  change,  charge  or  encumber 
the  said  premises,  or  any  part  thereof,  but  that  the  same  is  con- 
veyed by  them  in  as  full  and  ample  manner  as  the  same  is  con- 
veved  to  them  first,  from  anv  charge,  lien  or  incumbrance,  created 
by  them,  or  either  of  them. 

In  wi'ness  whereof  the  said  parties  have  hereunto  interchangea- 
biv  set  their  hands  and  seals,  the  dav  and  vear  first  above  men- 
tioned. 

GARRET  D.  WALL,         [l.  s.l 
HENllY'C.  CAREY.         [l.  s.] 
WILLIAM  J.  WATSON,  [l.  s.] 
Signed,  sealed  and  delivered,  ) 
in  the  presence  of  j 

James  W.  Wall. 

State  of  New  Jersey,  )  . 

i>     , -  ,,        .  Wo  wit  : 

nurlmgton  County,      ) 

Re  it  remembered,  that  on  the  twelfth  day  of  March,  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-seven,  be- 
fore me,  James  W.  Wall,  one  of  the  Masters  of  the  Court  of 
Chancery  of  the  state  of  New  Jersey,  personally  appeared  Garret 

D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  and  I  having 


loo 

first  made  known  to  them  the  contents  of  the  foregoing  deed,  and 
being  satisfied  that  they  are  the  grantors  mentioned  in  the  said 
deed,  they  the  said  Garret  D.  Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William 
J.  Watson,  thereupon  severally  acknowledged  that  they  signed, 
sealed  and  delivered,  as  their  several  voluntary  act  and  deed,  for 
the  and  purposes  therein  mentioned. 

All  which  is  certified  bv  me. 

JAMES  W.  WALL,  M.  C.  C. 

Recorded  April  7th,  A.  D.  1847. 

JAMES  ROGERS,  Clerk. 

State  of  New  Jersey,  ) 
Burlington  County,      ) 

I,  Joseph  F.  Burr,  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  said 
county  of  Burlington,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  is  a  true, 
full  and  correct  copy  of  the  record  of  the  deed  between  the  par- 
ties named  therein,  as  full  and  entire  as  the  same  is  recorded  in 
my  office,  in  Book  24  of  Deeds,  page  136,  &c. 

Jn  testimony  whereof  I  have  set  mv  hand  and  ofli- 
[l.  s.]  cial  seal  hereto  this  October  7th,  A.  D.  eighteen 

hundred  and  fifty-two. 

JOSEPH  F.  BURR,  Clerk. 


L. 

Rev.  George  W.  Doane  and  Wife, 

to  ±  $15,000. 

Henry  R.  Cleveland. 

Abstract  of  a  mortgage  from  the  Right  Reverend  George  W. 
Doane  and  Eliza  Greene,  his  wife,  of  the  city  of  Burlington,  and 
the  township  of  Burlington,  in  the  county  of  Burlington,  and  state 
of  New  Jersey,  to  Henry  R.  Cleveland,  of  Boston,  in  the  county 
of  Suffolk,  and  state  of  Massachusetts,  dated  the  nineteenth  day 
of  September,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  eighteen  hundred  and  thirty- 
eight,  to  secure  the  payment  of  fifteen  thousand  dollars,  on  or 
before  t he  second  day  of  March,  which  will  be  in  the  year  of  our 
Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty-three,  with  interest  on 
the  sum  of  eleven  thousand  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars,  from 
the  date  hereof,  until  the  eighteenth  day  of  April,  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  forty-one,  and  interest  on  seven  thousand  five 
hundred  dollars,  from  the  last  mentioned  date  to  the  second  day 
of  March,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-four,  and  interest 
on  three  thousand  seven  hundred  and  fiftv  dollars,  from  the  last 
mentioned  date  to  the  eighth  day  of  April,  one  thousand  eight 


156 

hundred  and  forty-seven;  the  interest  on  said  sums  to  be  paid 
annually,  according  to  the  condition  of  a  certain  bond  given  by 
the  said  George  W.  Doane  to  the  said  Henry  R.  Cleveland,  bear- 
ing equal  date  herewith,  in  the  penal  sum  of  thirty  thousand  dol- 
lars ;  all  that  certain  messuage  or  tenement,  with  the  out-buildings, 
and  lot,  or  piece  of  land  thereunto  belonging,  situate  on  the  Green 
Bank,  in  the  city  of  Burlington,  aforesaid,  bounded  and  described 
as  follows,  to  wit : 

[Here  follows  description  of  three  lots,  viz: 

J.  Two  acres  and  three  quarters. 

2.  Two  acres  and  ten  perches. 

3.  The  lot   which   Elihu  Chauncey,  *by   deed  of  2d   of  April, 
1836,  conveved  to  George  W.  Doane. 

These  lots  are  believed  to  be  the  Riverside  property.] 
Recorded  September  20th,  A.  D.  1838. 

JOHN  R.  SLACK,  Cl'k. 


M. 

Right  Rev.  George  VV.  Doane, 

to 
Sarah  C.  Robardet. 

Abstract  of  a  Mortgage  from  the  Right  Reverend  George  W. 
Doane,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington,  in  the  state  of  New 
Jersey,  D.  D.,  L.  L.  D.,  and  Eliza  G.,  his  wife,  to  Sarah  C.  Rob- 
ardet, of  the  said  city  of  Burlington,  widow,  dated  the  eleventh 
day  of  March,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hun- 
dred and  forty-seven,  to  secure  the  payment  of  three  thousand 
dollars,  lawful  money  in  the  United  Stales  of  America,  in  one 
year  from  the  date  thereof,  with  interest,  at  the  rate  of  six  per 
cent,  per  annum,  payable  semi-annually,  all  that  certain  lot  of  land 
situate  on  the  southwardly  side  of  Pearl  street,  to  the  westward 
of  Ellis  street,  in  the  city  of  Burlington  aforesaid. 

Here  follows  description  of  the  property,  containing  twelve 
acres  and  fourteen  hundredths  of  an  acre,  being  the  same  proper- 
ty described  in  the  mortgage  to  William  Chester,  Appendiv  V. 
park  ;  being  the  same  premises  that  Dv.  William  Chester  and 
Frances  Mary,  his  wife,  granted  and  conveyed  to  the  said  George 
W.  Doane,  by  deed,  bearing  date  the  twentieth  day  of  April,  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-six,  and  to  be  recorded  together, 
&c. 

Recorded  March  42th,  A.  D.,  1847. 

JAMES  ROGERS,  Cl'k. 


157 

State  of  New  Jersey,  ) 
Burlington  county.      ) 

I,  Joseph  F.  Burr,  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  of  the 
county  of  Burlington,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  is  a 
true,  full  and  correct  copy  of  the  record  of  the  mortgage  between 
the  parties  therein  mentioned,  as  full  and  entire  as  the  same  re- 
mains of  record  in  my  office,  in  book  R.  of  mortgages,  page  23, 
&c. 

In  testimony  whereof  I  have  set  my  hand  and  seal 
[l.  s.]  of  said  court  hereto,  this  nyith  day  of  September, 

A.  D.,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-three. 

JOSEPH  F.  BURR,  Cl'k. 


N  1. 


I 


CEORGE  W.  DoAtfE 

to 
Joseph  Deacon.        ^ 

Abstract  of  a  mortgage  from  the  Right  Reverend  George 
Washington  Doane,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington,  in  the 
state  of  New  Jersey,  D.  D.,  L.  L.  D.,  and  Eliza  G.,  his  wife,  to 
Joseph  Deacon,  of  the  township  of  Northampton,  county  and  suite 
aforesaid,  farmer,  dated  the  fifteenth  day  of  March,  in  the  year 
of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-seven,  to  se- 
cure the  payment  of  eight  thousand  dollars,  lawful  money  of  the 
United  States  of  America,  in  one  year  from  the  date  thereof,  with 
interest,  at  the  rate  of  six  per  cent,  per  annum,  payable  semi-an- 
nually:  all  those  four  certain  lots,  pieces  or  parcels  of  ground,  ad- 
joining and  contiguous  to  each  other  city  in  the  city  of  Burling- 
ton aforesaid,  wiih  all  and  singular  the  buildings  thereon,  known 
as  St.  Mary's  Hall,  and  others  adjoining  thereto,  and  in  one  boun- 
dary the  whole  are  thus  described:  on  the  north  by  low  water 
mark  in  the  river  Delaware,  on  the  east  by  Ellis  street,  on  the 
south  bv  Pearl  street,  and  on  the  west  bv  land  conveved  by  Elihu 
Chauncey,  Esquire,  to  ilie  said  George  Washington  Doane,  being 
?lie  same  four  lots,  pieces  or  parcels  of  ground,  that  Garret  D. 
Wall,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson,  Esquires,  granted 
and  conveyed  to  the  said  George  Washington  Doane,  in  fee,  by 
indenture,  bearing  date  ihe  twelfth  day  of  March,  in  the  year  of 
■  »ur  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-seven,  and  intend- 
ed to  be  forthwith  recorded  in  the  clerk's  office  of  the  said  county 
o(  Burlington,  together  &c. 

Recorded  April  7th,  A,  D.  1847. 

JAMES  ROGERS,  Cl'k. 


153 

N2. 

George  W.  Doane  and  Wife,  \ 

to  ( $5,000. 

Joseph  Deacon'.  ) 

Abstract  of  a  mortgage  from  George  Washington  Doane  and 
Eliza  G.  Doane,  his  wife,  of  the  city  of  Burlington,  county  of 
Builingfon  and  state  of  New  Jersey,  to  Joseph  Deacon,  of  the 
township  of  Northampton,  county  and  state  aforesaid,  dated  ihe 
second  day  of  April,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  thirty-eight,  to  secure  the  payment  of  five  thousand 
dollars,  good  and  lawful  money  of  the  United  States,  in  one  year 
from  the  date  hereof,  with  lawful  interest  for  the  same  from  (his 
date,  all  that  certain  messuage  or  tenement,  with  the  out-build- 
ings and  lot  or  piece  of  ground  thereunto  belonging,  situate  and 
lying  on  ihe  Green  Bank,  in  the  city  of  Burlington  and  state  ot 
New  Jersey  aforesaid,  bounded  and  described  as  follows,  to  wit: 
Beginning  on  the  north  side  of  Peat  I  street,  at  a  corner  of  land 
late  belonging  to  George  Dyhvinn;  thence  by  the  said  Pear; 
.street  about  seventy-five  degrees  two  chains  and  sixteen  links,  to 
the  corner  of  a  certain  two  acre  lot  formerly  of  James  Verre; 
thence  further  the  same  course  fifty-eight  feet  to  the  southwest- 
wardlv  corner  of  land  formerly  belonging  to  John  Byrne;  theecc 
along  an  old  line  about  north  by  west  about  eleven  chains  and 
sixteen  links  to  low  water  mark  of  the  river  Delaware  ;  thence 
up  the  said  river  about  three  chains  and  four  links  to  the  lot  for- 
merly of  George  Dylwinn;  thence  in  the  line  thereof  about  south 
by  east  to  Pearl  street,  at  the  place  of  beginning  ;  containing  two 
acres  and  three-quarters,  more  or  less,  besides  and  including  the 
water  lots  and  the  flats  fronting  the  same.  And  also  all  that  lot 
or  piece  of  ground  situate  in  the  city  of  Burlington  aforesaid, 
bounded  as  follows:  Beginning  at  a  stone  for  a  corner  on  the 
north  side  of  Pearl  street,  seventy-five  links  to  the  westward  of 
the  southeast  corner  of  a  lot  formerly  the  property  of  Elias 
Strieker,  and  four  feet  and  a  half  to  the  westward  of  the  trunks 
of  the  second  row  of  apple  trees,  counting  westward  from  the 
east  side  of  the  lot  formerly  of  Sarah  Lee;  then  from  that  said 
stone  running  along  Peatl  street  south  seventy  two  degrees  west 
two  chains  and  eleven  links  to  the  corner  of  the  lot  sold  by  the 
executors  of  James  Verre  the  elder  to  George  Eyre  and  Isaac 
Cannons  ;  then  along  a  line  of  the  same  about  north  twelve  de- 
grees and  fifteen  minutes  west  ten  chains  and  ninety-three  links 
to  the  river  Delaware  at  low  water  mark  ;  then  bounded  up  the 
said  river  about  one  chain  and  seventy  links  until  a  course  near 
about  south  fourteen  and  a  quarter  degrees,  just  dealing  th'v 
southwest  corner  of  the  house  in  which   the  said  Sarah  Lee  for- 


159 

merly  lived,  and  running  four  and  a  half  feet  from  the  trunks  of  the 
said  row  of  appie  trees, distance  ten  chains  and  eighty-five  links,  will 
strike  the  beginning  corner;  containing  two  acres  and  ten  perch- 
es, or  thereabouts.  And  also  all  that  lot  and  piece  of  ground, 
and  tenement  thereon  erected,  situate  in  the  said  city  of  Burling- 
ton, bounded  on  the  north  by  low  water  mark  on  the  river  Dela- 
ware, east  by  ground  belonging  to  the  estate  of  John  \.  Barba- 
rouse,  lately  deceased,  south  by  Pearl  street,  and  west  by  a  small 
lot  formerly  of  Franklin  E.  Craft,  which  three  above  described 
lots  or  piece  of  land  and  premises  are  the  same  which  the  said 
George  XV.  Doane  purchased  of  Elihu  Cauncey,  Esq.,  by  deed  of 
bargain  and  sale,  bearing  date  the  second  day  of  April,  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eii^ht  hundred  and  thirtv-six,  ami 
recorded  in  the  Clerk's  office  of  the  county  of  Burlington,  at 
Mount  Holly,  in  book  O  3  of  deeds,  page  215,  &c.  Reference 
thereunto  being  had,  the  same,  together  with  the  antecedent  title, 
will  more  fullv  and  at  large  appear.     Together,  &c. 

Recorded  August  27,  A.  D.  1838. 

JOHN  R.  SLACK,  CVk. 
State  op  New  Jersey,  ) 

Burlington  county,      ) 

I,  Joseph  F.  Burr,  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  the 
county  of  Burlington,  do  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing  is  a 
true,  full  and  correct  copy  of  the  record  of  the  mortgage  between 
the  parties  therein  mentioned,  as  full  and  entire  as  the  same  re- 
mains of  record  in  my  office  in  book  M  of  mortgages,  page  404,. 
&c. 

In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  set  mv  hand  and  seal  nf 

[l.  s  ]        said  Court  hereto,  this  ninth  day  of  September,  A.  D. 
eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-three. 

JOSEPH  F.  BURR,  Cl'k. 


0. 

Rev.  Geokge  W.  Doane 
to 

Isaac  B.  Parker. 
Abstract  of  a  mortgage  from  the  Right  Reverend  Goorge  \V. 
Doane,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington,  in  the  State  of  New 
Jersey,  I).  1).,  L.  L.  D.,  and  Eliza  G.  his  wife,  to  Isaac  B.  Par- 
ker, of  the  said  city  of  Burlington,  gentleman,  Jeremiah  C.  Garth- 
watte,  of  the  city  of  Newark,  gentleman.  William  Wright,  of  the 
city  of  Newark,  gentleman,  Nathan  B.  Thorp,  of  Rahway,  mer- 
chant, Samuel  Meeker,  of  the  city  of  Newark,  gentleman,  and 


160 

Richard  S.  Field,  of  Princeton,  counsellor  at  law,  all  of  the  State 
of  New  Jersey,  dated   the  fifteenth   day  of  April,  in  the  year  of 
our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-seven,  to  secure 
the  payment  of  the  following  sums:     Whereas,  the  said  George 
VV.  Doane  in  and  by  six  obligations  or  writings  obligatory,  under 
his  hand  and  seal,  duly  executed  and  bearing  even  date  herewith, 
stands   bound   unto   the   respective  parties  of  the  second  part  as 
follows  :  No.  1.  To  Isaac  B.  Parker  in   the   sum  of  ten  thousand 
dollars,  lawful   money  of  the  United   States   of  America,  condi- 
tioned for  the  payment  of  five  thousand  dollars  in  ten  semi-annual 
payments  of  five  hundred   dollars   each,  with   interest  at  the  rate 
of  six  per  cent,  per  annum,  payable  semi-annually  ;  the  first  semi- 
annual payment  to  be   made  on   the   fifteenth   day  of  November 
next  ensuing  the  date   hereof.     No.  2.  To  William  Wright  in  the 
sum  of  six  thousand  dollars,  conditioned  for  the  payment  of  three 
thousand  dollars  in  like  manner  as  above.     No.  3.  To  Jeremiah 
Garthwaite  in   the   sum  of  six  thousand   dollars,  conditioned   for 
the  payment  of  three  thousand  dollars  in  like   manner  as  above. 
No.  4.  To  Nathan  B.  Thorp  in   the  sum   of  three   thousand  dol- 
lars, conditioned  for  the  payment  of  one   thousand  five  hundred 
dollars  in  like  manner  as  above.     No.  5.  To   Samuel  Meeker  in 
the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  conditioned   for   the  payment  of 
live  hundred  dollars  in  like  manner  as  above.     No.  G.  To  Richard 
S.  Field   in  the   sum  of  one  thousand   dollars,  lawful   money  as 
aforesaid,  conditioned  for  the  payment  of  five  hundred  dollars  in 
like   manner   as  aforesaid  $  provided  nevertheless,  that  if  any  of 
the  aforesaid  half  yearly  payments  of  principal  or  interest  should 
remain  unpaid  for  three  months  after  being  due,  and  payment  de- 
manded, then  it  is  expressly  stipulated  and  agreed  that  the  whole 
amount  of  principal  of  the  respective  obligations,  and   the  inter- 
est due  thereon,  shall  be  due  and  payable  on  demand,  without  any 
fraud  or  further  delay,  as  in  and  by  the  recited  obligations  and  con- 
ditions thereof,  relation  being  thereunto  had  may  more  fully  and  at 
large  appear.     All  those  four  adjoining  lots,  pieces  or  parrels  of 
ground,  with  the  buildings  thereon,  known  as  St.  Mary's  Hall,  and 
other  the  houses,  school-houses  and  other  buildings  thereon,  situate 
in  the  city  of  Burlington  and  state  of  New  Jersey,  containing   in 
front  or  breadth  on  the  river  Delaware   about   two  hundred  feet, 
and  extending  in  depth  southwardly  to  Pearl   street.     The  afore- 
said lots,  in  one   boundary*  being   as  aforesaid,  and    bounded   on 
the  north  by  low  water  mark  in  the  river  Delaware,  east  by  El- 
lis street,  south  by  Pearl  street,  and   west  by  the  lot  of  ground 
conveyed  by  Elihu  Chauncey  to  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  be- 
ing the  same  four  lots  of  ground  and  premises   that  Garret  I). 
Wall,  Esq.,  Henry  C.  Carey  and  William  J.  Watson  granted  and 
conveyed  to  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  in  fee,  by  indenture. 


161 

bearing  date  the  twelfth  day  of  March,  in  the  year  of  our  Lore? 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-seven,  and  duly  recorded 
in  the  clerk's  office  of  the  said  county  of  Burlington,  at  Mount 
Holly,  together,  &c. 

Recorded  April  17th,  A.  D.,  1847. 

J  A  MES  ROGERS,  Clerk. 


Transferred  to  post  T.,  quod  vide, 


Q. 

George  W.  Doaxe, 

to  I 

Isaac  B.  Parker,  Thomas  Milxor,  y 

and 
J.  C.  Garthwaite,  and  others.       J 

This  indenture,  made  the  tenth  day  of  the  month  of  June,  in 
?he  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-eight, 
between  the  Right  Reverend  George  W.  Doane,  D.  D.,  LL.  D.,  of 
the  city  and  county  of  Burlington,  in  the  state  of  New  Jersey, 
and  Eliza  G.,  his  wife,  parties  of  the  first  part;  and  Isaac  B.Par- 
ker, of  the  said  city  of  Burlington,  gentleman  ;  Thomas  Milnor, 
of  the  same  place,  coal  merchant ;  Richard  S.  Field,  of  Prince- 
ton, counsellor  at  law  ;■  Jeremiah  Garthwaite,  of  the  city  of  New- 
ark, merchant,  and  Nathan  Thorp,  of  Rahway,  of  the  county  of 
Middlesex,  and  all  of  the  state  of  New  Jersey,  parties  of  the  se- 
cond part,  witnesseth,  that  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  and  Eliza, 
his  wife,  for  and  in  consideration  of  the  sum  of  one  dollar,  lawful 
money  of  the  United  States  of  America,  unto  them  in  hand  well 
and  truly  paid,  by  the  said  parties  of  the  second  part,  at  and  be- 
fore the  sealing  and  delivery  of  these  presents,  the  receipt  where- 
of is  hereby  acknowledged,  have  given,  granted,  bargained,  solo, 
aliened,  enfeoffed,  conveyed  and  confirmed,  and  by  these  presents 
do  give,  grant,  bargain,  sell,  alien,  enfeoff,  coireyed  and  confirm- 
ed, unto  the  said  parties  of  the  second  part,  and  to  their  heirs  and 
assigns,  all  those  four  lots,  pieces  or  parcels  of  land,  situate  in  the 
city  of  Burlington,  in  the  county  of  Burlington,  and  state  of  New 
Jersey. 

[Here  follows  the  description  of — 1st.  St.  Mary's  Hall,  Schoo 
Houses,  Chapel  and  other  buildings.     2d.  The  lot  of  twelve  teres, 

L 


1C2 

sixty-four  hundredths,  (supposed  to  be  his  residence  at  Riverside.) 
3d.  Two  meadow  lots,  one  of  four  acres,  the  other  of  two  acres.] 
In  trust,  nevertheless,  that  they,  the  said  parties  of  the  first 
part,  and  the  survivors  and  survivors  of  them,  and  the  heirs  and 
assigns  of  such  survivor,  shall  hold  the  same  to  and  for  the  use  of 
the  following  named  persons,  who  have  loaned  to  the  said  George 
W.  Doane,  the  sum  of  fifty  thousand  dollars,  as  by  certificates  of 
loan  issued  and  bearing  even  date  herewith,  as  follows:  to  Law- 
son  Carter,  five  thousand  dollars  ;  Joseph  Deacon,  three  thousand 
dollars  ;  Michael  Hays,  three  thousand  dollars ;  Isaac  B.  Parker, 
two  thousand  dollars;  Thomas  B.  Woolman,  two  thousand  dol- 
lars; William  Wright,  two  thousand  dollars;  Nathan  Thorp,  one 
thousand  five  hundred  dollars;  Thomas  Dugdale,  one  thousand 
dollars;  Franklin  Woolman,  one  thousand  dollars,  in  four  certifi- 
cates of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  each  ;  Taylor  and  Dugdale, 
one  thousand  dollars;  Thomas  Dutton,  one  thousand  dollars,  Sa- 
rah C.  Robardet,  one  thousand  dollars;  William  H.  Carse,  one 
thousand  dollars;  Henry  C.  Carey,  one  thousand  dollars  ;  Charles 
Bispham,  one  thousand  dollars;  Abraham  Brown,  one  thousand 
dollars;  Elias  1).  B.  Ogden,  one  thousand  dollars;  John  J.  Chet- 
wood,  one  thousand  dollars;  Joel  W.  Condit,  one  thousand  dol- 
lars ;  Samuel  Meeker,  one  thousand  dollars  ;  Jeremiah  C.  Garth- 
waite,  one  thousand  dollars;  Christianna  Lippincott,  one  thousand 
dollars;  George  P.  McCullock,  three  hundred  and  fifty  dollars; 
Edward  Morris,  five  hundred  dollars;  Thomas  Miller,  five  hun- 
dred dollars;  George  Gaskill,  five  hundred  dollars;  Edward  B. 
Grubb,  one  thousand  dollars;  Samuel  Rogers,  five  hundred  dol- 
lars; William  A.  Rogers,  five  hundred  dollars  ;  Wardrop  J.  Hall, 
five  hundred  dollars;  Isaac  Alfred  Shreve,  live  hundred  dollars; 
David  tlarmer,  five  hundred  dollars;  William  Mcllvaine,  five  hun- 
dred dollars;  Albert  Havens,  five  hundred  dollars;  Ed vvard  Har- 
ris, five  hundred  dollars;  John  Dobbins,  five  hundred  dollars; 
John  Black,  five  hundred  dollars  ;  John  Irick,  five  hundred  dollars ; 
Hiram  Hutchinson,  five  hundred  dollars;  Ralph  Marsh,  five  hun- 
dred dollars  ;  James  M.  Quimby,  five  hundred  dollars  ;  William 
J.  Watson,  five  hundred  dollars;  David  Babbitt,  M.  D.,  one  thou- 
sand dollars,  in  two  certificates  of  five  hundred  dollars  each  ;  Rev. 
.lames  A.  Williams,  one  thousand  dollars,  in  two  certificates  of 
five  hundred  dollars  each  ;  Alfred  A.  Sloan,  three  hundred  dol- 
lars; John  G.  Clark,  three  hundred  dollars;  Henry  A.  Ford, 
three  hundred  dollars  ;  George  P.  Mitchell,  three  hundred  dollars; 
Thomas  Hopkins  and  son,  three  hundred  dollars;  William  C. 
Meyers,  three  hundred  dollars;  Jonathan  J.  Spencer,  M.  D.,  two 
hundred  and  fifty  dollars ;  Frederick  Schuchard,  two  hundred 
and  fifty  dollars ;  Jacob  Mitchell,  two  hundred  dollars;  Daniel 
Bennitt,  two  hundred  dollars  :  Barak  T.  Nichols,  two  hundred  and 


• 


163 

fifty  dollars;  William  S.  Faitoute,  two  hundred  and  fifty  dol- 
lars; Charles  H.  Fenimore,  three  hundred  and  fifty  dollars;  Wil- 
liam Stone  three  hundred  dollars,  and  Francis  Roth,  three  hun- 
dred dollars,  together  with  interest,  at  the  rate  of  six  per  cent, 
per  annum  on  said  sums,  payable  at  the  Mechanics  Bank  of  Bur- 
lington, on  the  tenth  day  of  November,  and  the  tenth  day  of  May, 
in  each  year,  and  one  twentieth  part  of  the  principal  sum,  to  be 
also  payable  at  the  same  place,  on  the  tenth  day  of  May,  in  the 
year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty,  and  a  like 
portion  on  each  succeeding  tenth  day  of  November  and  tenth  day 
of  May,  until  the  whole  is  paid,  as  in  and  by  the  said  recited  cer- 
tificates appears:  provided  always,  nevertheless,  that  if  the  said 
parties  of  the  first  part,  their  heirs,  executors,  administrators  or 
assigns,  do  and  shall  well  and  truly  pay,  or  cause  to  be  paid,  unto 
the  holders  of  the  said  certificates,  their  respective  heirs,  execu- 
tors, administrators  or  assigns,  the  amount  of  the  respective  certi- 
ficates, as  hereinbefore  mentioned,  on  the  days  and  times  herein- 
before mentioned,  and  appointed  for  the  payment  of  the  same,  to- 
gether with  interest,  at  the  rate  of  six  per  cent.,  and  without  de- 
duction, defalcation  or  abatement,  to  be  made  of  any  thing  for  or 
in  respect  of  any  taxes,  charges,  assess  whatsoever,  that  then  and 
from  thenceforth,  as  well  this  present  indenture  and  the  estate 
hereby  granted,  as  the  said  recited  certificate  of  loan,  shall  cease, 
determine  and  become  void,  anything  hereinbefore  contained,  to 
the  contrary  thereof  in  anvwise  notwithstanding.  In  witness 
whereof  the  said  parties  of  the  first  part  have  hereunto  set  their 
hands  and  seals,  dated  the  dav  and  year  first  written. 

G.  W.  DOANE,  [l.  s.] 

ELIZA  G.  DOANE,  [l.  s.] 

Signed,  sealed  and  delivered,  in  the  presence  of.  [The  words 
(in  four  certificates  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars  each)  inter- 
lined once  in  24th  line  of  3d  page,  and  (three)  and  fifty  in  35th 
line  of  same  page,  interlined  once,  and  the  word  (seven,)  being 
the  first  word  of  same  line  erased,  and  fifty  dollars  in  14th  line  of 
this  page,  erased  before  signing.] 

James  W.  Braddix, 
Franklin  Woolmax. 

Acknowledged  20th  June,  1S48.      Recorded  June  21,  A.  D.. 

1848. 

JAMES  ROGERS,  Clerk. 


t 


164 

R  1. 

New  Jersey,  ss-, 

Joseph  Deacon,  of  the  county  of  Burlington,  aged  seventy-seven 
years,  alleging  himself  conscientiously  scrupulous  of  taking  an 
oath,  and  being  duly  affirmed  according  to  law,  doth  declare  and 
say,  that  he  has  been  in  the  practice  of  endorsing  notes  for  George 
W.  Doane,  Bishop  of  New  Jersey,  for  a  period  of  twelve  or  thir- 
teen years,  and  this  affirmant  never  asked  said  George  W.  Doane 
to  pay  him  anything  for  said  endorsements.  After  this  affirmant 
had  endorsed  said  Doane's  notes  for  several  years,  he  became 
tired  of  endorsing  for  him,  and  told  him  that  he  preferred  lending 
him  some  money,  if  he  would  give  this  affirmant  security  ;  and 
accordingly,  on  or  about  the  fifteenth  day  of  March,  in  the  year 
of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-seven,  he,  this 
affirmant,  loaned  to  said  George  W.  Doane,  the  sum  of  eight 
thousand  dollars,  on  his  bond  and  mortgage.  But  notwithstand- 
ing this  loan,  the  said  George  W.  Doane  still  importuned  him  to 
endorse  more  notes  for  him,  informing  said  affirmant  that  his 
schools  increased  so  much  he  was  obliged  to  enlarge  his  school 
rooms.  This  affirmant  replied  that  his  schools  were  large  enough, 
and  that  he  could  make  as  much  with  the  schools  he  had,  as  if 
they  were  larger;  but  he  still  insisted  upon  this  affirmant's  endors- 
ing his  notes,  and  he  repeatedly  assured  this  affirmant  that  he 
should  never  lose  one  cent  by  him.  These  assurances  were  not 
only  made  verbally,  but  in  writing.  In  a  letter,  without  date,  (as 
almost  every  lei ter  written  by  said  George  W.  Doane  to  this  af- 
firmant was  without  date)  but  which  letter  was  received  by  this 
affirmant  about  the  eleventh  of  January,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-nine,  the  said  George  \V. 
Doane  says,  "  you  will  not  lose  one  cent  f  and  in  another  letter  to 
tills  affirmant,  the  said  George  W.  Doane  said,  "  you  may  rest  as- 
sured that  you  shall  suffer  no  loss  through  me."  In  another  letter, 
directed  to  Mr.  Germain,  and  handed  by  said  Germain  to  this  af* 
firmant,  the  said  George  W.  Doane  says,  "  my  dear  Mr.  Germain, 
say  to  Mr.  Deacon  for  me,  he  shall  not  lose  one  single  dollar." 
After  I  had  indorsed  a  long  time  for  him,  he  offered  me  a  check 
for  twenty-five  or  fifty  dollars;  I  told  him  I  did  not  want  if,  all  I 
wanted  was  security.  He  insisted  on  my  taking  the  check,  and 
put  it  into  my  vest  pocket.  Sometimes  he  would  send  me  notes 
For  one  thousand  dollars,  to  be  indorsed  by  me,  and  sometimes  he 
would  send  a  check  as  a  present  along  with  them,  and  sometimes 
he  would  come  out  to  my  house  himself,  and  get  me  to  indorse 
them.  In  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-seven  and  eighteen 
hundred  and  forty-eight,  he  did  not  pay  his  notes  in  full;  they 
were   renewed.,  and  only  a   small   sum  paid   on  them.     In  May, 


• 


165 

eighteen  hundred  and  forty-eight,  I  thought  I  knew  what  amount 
of  notes  1  had  indorsed   for  him,  but  for  fear  I  was  mistaken,  I 
asked  said  George  W.  Doane  if  he  knew  what  amount  of  notes  of 
his  I  was  indorsee  on.     He  said  he  did.     I  then  told  him  I  wished 
he  would  give   me  the  exact   amount,  and  he  said  he  would,  and 
he  did  within  a  few  days  thereafter,  bringing  me  a  piece  of  paper 
having  on  it  in  figures,  the  sum  of  $11,500,  and  said  that  was  the 
amount  that  I  was  indorser  on  his  paper.     This  affirmant  then  said 
he  thought  he  was  indorser  on  his   said  Doane's  notes  for  twelve 
or  thirteen  thousand  dollars,  but  Bishop  Doane  then  said  that  eleven 
thousand  five  hundred  dollars  was   all  that  I  was  indorser  on,  at 
that  time.     Affirmant  then  told  Bishop  Doane  that  he  would  never 
indorse  another  note  for  him,  except  for  renewals  of  notes  of  said 
Bishop  Doane,  which  he,  this  affirmant,  had  indorsed  theretofore. 
Bishop  Doane  then  replied   that  he  wanted  no  others,  but  for  re- 
newals.    Sometime  in  October,  eighteen  hundred   and  forty-eight, 
or  January,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-nine,  according  to  the  best 
recollection  of  this   affirmant,  Bishop  Doane  sent   his  hired  man 
with  two  or  three   notes  for  this   affirmant  to  indorse,  and  this  af- 
firmant sent  them  back  without  indorsing  them.     Bishop  Doane 
sent  the  notes  back  to  me  the  next  dav,  with  a  letter  addressed  to 
me;  in  which  letter,  among  other  things,  he  makes  use  of  the  fol- 
lowing lan£ua£e.     "  The  note  at  Camden  was  renewed,  although 
the  President  thought  it  would   not  be.     It  was  a   favor  to   me. 
The  note  which  G.  P.  Mitchell  had,  was  one  obtained  for  renewal , 
but  the   cash  paid  instead.     I  have  had  no   note  from   you  for  a 
long  time,  except  for  renewals,  and  want  none."     Pie  further  says 
in  said  letter  that  "there  are   certain  notes  falling  due;  they  can 
be  renewed  with  your  name.     In  due  time  they  will  be  paid.    You 
will  not  lose  one  cent.     Will  you  aid  or  will  you  not?     If  you  will 
not,  I  cannot  help  it.     Every  note   renewed  will  be  given  you." 
He  further  says  in  said  letter,  "all  the   checks  will  be  made  good 
as  soon  as  possible,  very  truly,  your  friend."     And  this  affirmant 
further  says,  that  notwithstanding  the  promises  thus  made  by  Bishop 
Doane  to  this  affirmant,  he  did  not  return  to  this  affirmant  all  the 
old  notes,  but  the  same  were  all  protested,  and  this  affirmant  was 
called  on   to  pay  them,  and  has  paid  the  greatest  part  of  them, 
and  has  been  prosecuted,  and  judgment  obtained  against  this  af- 
firmant  for  the  residue.      And   this  affirmant  further  says,  that 
under  pretence  of  using  the  notes  indorsed  by  this  affirmant  only 
for  the  purpose  of  renewing  other  notes,  previously  endorsed  by 
this  affirmant,  the  said  George  W.  Doane  induced  this  affirmant 
to  endorse  notes  to  the  amount  of  eleven  or  twelve  thousand  dol- 
lars more  than  he  otherwise  would  have  indorsed  for  said  George 
W.  Doane;  and  that  after  he  obtained  said  indorsements,  he  ap- 
plied them  to  other  purposes  than  the  renewal  of  notes  previously 


166 

indorsed  by  this  affirmant,  and  which  said  notes  so  indorsed  have 
been  protested  for  non-payment,  and  this  affirmant  thereby  made 
liable  for  the  payment  thereof;  and  the  liability  of  this  affirmant 
for  the  debts  of  said  George  W.  Doane,  thus  doubled  without  his 
consent,  and  in  violation  of  Bishop  Doane's  promise;  and  that  the 
said  Bishop  Doane  thus  fraudulently  incurred  a  debt  to  this  affirm- 
ant, of  eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  at  least. 

And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  the  said  Bishop  Doane  sent 
Reuben  J.  Germain  to  this  affirmant,  with  a  note  of  one  thousand 
dollars,  and  requested  this  affirmant  to  indorse  it,  for  the  purpose 
of  renewing  a  note  for  the  same  amount  indorsed  by  this  affirmant, 
which  had  been  discounted  at  the  Camden  bank:  and  that  this  af- 
firmant indorsed  said  note,  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  said  note 
in  the  Camden  bank,  and  for  that  purpose  only.  And  this  affirm- 
ant further  says,  that  the  said  last  mentioned  indorsement  thus  ob- 
tained, was  not  applied  to  the  renewal  of  the  note  in  said  Camden 
bank,  but  was  passed  to  Thomas  Dugdale,  and  the  note  in  the  saTd 
Camden  bank,  for  the  renewal  of  which  the  said  indorsement  was 
given,  was  suffered  to  be  protested,  and  this  affirmant  was  called 
upon  to  pay  the  same;  and  the  statement  made  by  Bishop  Doane. 
in  his  letter  to  this  affirmant,  "  that  the  note  at  the  Camden  bank 
was  renewed,"  was  false. 

And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  there  were  two  notes  of  the 
said  Bishop  Doane  indorsed  by  this  affirmant,  held  by  or  discount- 
ed at  the  Burlington  bank,  one  for  the  sum  of  seven  hundred  dol- 
lars, and  the  other  for  the  sum  of  seven  hundred  and  fifty  dollars; 
and  the  said  Bishop  Doane  induced  and  procured  this  affirmant  to 
indorse  two  other  notes  of  like  amount,  under  pretence  that  he 
wanted  the  said  last  mentioned  indorsements  to  renew  said  notes ; 
and  that  after  he  had  thus  obtained  the  two  last  mentioned  in- 
dorsements, he  applied  said  notes  so  indorsed  to  other  purposes, 
and  one  of  said  notes  this  affirmant  believes  he  passed  to  Franklin 
Woolman. 

And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  another  indorsement  pro- 
cured by  said  Bishop  Doane,  under  pretence  that  it  was  to  renew 
a  note  of  said  George  W.  Doane,  previously  indorsed  by  this  af- 
firmant, was  also  applied  to  a  purpose  entirely  different  from  that 
for  which  alone  it  was  endorsed  by  this  affirmant,  and  was,  with- 
out his  consent,  passed  away  to  one  George  P.  Mitchell;  and  the 
fact  is  admitted  in  the  letter  of  Bishop  Doane  to  this  affirmant, 
wherein  he  says,  "this  note  which  G.  P.  Mitchell  had,  was  one 
obtained  for  renewal,  but  the  cash  paid  instead."  And  this  depo- 
nent further  says,  that  the  pretended  excuse  which  Bishop  Doane 
renders  for  this  gross  violation  of  his  promises,  viz:  "the  cash 
was  paid  instead,"  this  affirmant  believes  to  be  wholly  untrue. 

And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  on  the  twentieth  day  of 


167 

December,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  forty-eight,  George  W.  Doane  wrote  a  letter  to  this  affirmant 
in  the  following  words,  to  wit : 

Riverside,  20th  Dec,  1848. 
Dear  Sm: — Two  notes  of  $500  each,  with  your  name,  done  at 
Med  ford,  can  be  continued  in  one  of  $1,000.     Mr.  Germain  will 
explain  the  case  to  you. 

Your  faithful  friend, 

G.  W.  Doane." 

And  that  the  said  letter  was  delivered  to  this  affirmant  by  Reuben 
J.  Germain,  and  the  said  Reuben  J.  Germain  also  produced  at  the 
same  time,  a  note  drawn  by  said  George  W.  Doane,  payable  to 
said  Reuben  J.  Germain,  for  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  and 
indorsed  by  the  said  Reuben  J.  Germain,  and  bearing  date  on  or 
about  the  twentieth  day  of  December,  in  the  year  aforesaid,  and 
requested  him  to  indorse  the  said  promissory  note  of  one  thousand 
dollars,  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  the  said  two  notes  of  George 
Vvr.  Doane  for  five  hundred  dollars  each,  discounted  at  the  Med- 
ford  bank,  referred  to  in  the  letter  of  said  George  W.  Doane :  and 
this  affirmant  further  says,  that  he  had  been,  previously  to  the  re- 
ceipt of  said  letter  of  said  George  W.  Doane,  in  the  practice  of  in- 
dorsing notes  of  said  George  W.  Doane,  payable  to  Reuben  J. 
Germain;  and  that  some  of  the  said  notes  had  been  discounted  in 
the  said  Med  ford  bank.  And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that 
placing  implicit  confidence  in  the  declaration  of  the  said  George 
W.  Doane,  contained  in  his  said  letter,  and  also  upon  the  charac- 
ter of  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  as  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  and 
a  Bishop  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  he  indorsed  the  said  promisso- 
ry note  of  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  for  the  sum  of  one  thousand 
dollars,  as  aforesaid,  for  the  sole  and  only  purpose  of  enabling  the 
said  George  \V.  Doane  to  rene.w  and  take  up  two  notes  of  the 
said  George  VV.  Doane,  for  five  hundred  dollars  each,  which  had 
been  discounted  in  the  Medford  bank,  and  on  which  the  said 
George  W.  Doane,  by  his  said  letter,  and  the  said  Reuben  J.  Ger- 
main, his  said  agent,  had  represented  that  the  said  Joseph  Deacon 
was  endorser.  And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  after  the  said 
George  W.  Doane  had  thus,  by  this  false  pretence,  obtained  the 
indorsement  of  the  said  affirmant,  to  the  said  note  of  one  thousand 
dollars,  he  applied  the  said  note  towards  the  payment  of  one  note 
of  five  hundred  doliars,  which  had  been  discounted  in  the  said 
Medford  bank,  and  on  which  said  note  this  affirmant  was  not  an 
indorser,  but  which  was  indorsed  by  Thomas  Dugdale;  and  also, 
to  another  note  of  five  hundred  dollars,  on  which  this  affirmant 
was  an  indorser,  whereby  this  affirmant  was  made  liable  to  pay 
the  sum  of  five  hundred  dollars  more,  by  reason  of  his  said  in- 


163 

dorsement  of  the  said  note  of  one  thousand  dollars,  procured  from 
him  as  aforesaid,  than  he  was  or  could  have  been  liable  for  if  he 
,'iad  not  indorsed  said  note  of  one  thousand  dollars.  And  this  af- 
firmant further  says,  that  when  the  said  note  of  one  thousand  dol- 
lars, so  indorsed  by  this  affirmant,  as  aforesaid,  became  due,  the 
same  was  protested  for  non-payment,  and  this  affirmant  was  called 
on  to  pay  said  note;  and  this  affirmant  was  obliged  to  compro- 
mise with  the  holder  of  said  note,  and  did  compromise,  by  paying 
to  the  holder  of  said  note  of  one  thousand  dollars,  the  sum  of  seven 
hundred  dollars,  on  account  of  said  note  of  the  said  George  W. 
Doane,  by  reason  of  which  said  false  pretence  and  fraudulent  dec- 
laration, so  contained  in  his  said  above  reerted  letter,  the  said 
George  VV.  Doane  fraudulently  incurred  a  debt  or  obligation  to 
this  affirmant,  of  the  sum  of  five  hundred  dollars,  together  with 
the  interest  thereon. 

And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  the  said  George  W.  Doane, 
being  indebted  to  William  Page,  in  the  sum  of  five  hundred  dol- 
lars, for  money  borrowed  of  said  William,  on  his  own  personal 
responsibility,  without  the  security  or  liability  in  any  way  of  this 
affirmant;    and    the  said  William  Page  demanding   payment  of 
the  same,  and  the  said  George  W.  Doane  being  unable  to  pay  the 
same,  told  said  William  Page  that  he  would  give  him  his  note, 
with  a  good  indorser,  for  the   money,  and  then  sent  his  note  for 
five  hundred  dollars  to  this  affirmant,  and  requested  him  to  indorse 
it  for  the  purpose,  as  he  pretended,  of  renewing  another  note  of 
five  hundred  dollars,  which  was  about  to  become  due,  on  which 
this  affirmant  was  an  indorser;  and  after  the  said  Bishop  had,  by 
this  false  pretence,  procured  the  said  indorsement  of  this  affirmant, 
on  his  said  note  of  five  hundred  dollars,  he,  the  said  Bishop,  passed 
away  the  said  note  so  indorsed,  to  William  Page,  in  payment  of 
his  said  debt  to  said  William  Page,  and  for  which  said  affirmant 
was  in  no  way  liable,  and  when  ,he  was  not  an  indorser  on  any 
note  of  said  George  W.  Doane,  previously  held  by  said  William 
Page.     And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  the  said  note  of  five 
hundred  dollars,  thus  indorsed  by  this  affirmant,  and  thus  passed 
to  the  said  William  Page,  was  subsequently  protested,  and  this  af- 
firmant was  called  upon  to  pay  the  same,  but  this  affirmant  re- 
fused so  to  do,  alleging  that  the  said  endorsement  had  been  ob- 
tained from  him  improperly,  and  under  an  assurance  that  it  was 
to  be  used  onlv  for  a  renewal;  and  the  said  William  Pa^e  subse- 
quently  agreed  to  compromise  the  question  of  liability  of  said  af- 
firmant on  said  note,  and  release  him  from  his  said  indorsement, 
on  the  payment  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dollars.     And  by  means 
of  which  acts  and  pretences  of  the  said   George  W.  Doane,  he 
fraudulently  contracted  a  further  debt  and  incurred  a  further  obli- 
gation to  this  affirmant,  of  the  sum  of  two  hundred  and  fifty  dol- 
lars. 


169 

And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaite 
and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Ogilby,  sometime  in  the  latter  part  of  May  or 
the  first  of  June,  in  'the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  forty-eight,  came  to  this  affirmant  and  requested  me 
to  subscribe  to  a  loan  of  fifty  thousand  dollars.  They  said  this 
affirmant  must  subscribe  three  thousand  dollars.  This  affirmant 
asked  them  why  they  wanted  him  to  subscribe  three  thousand  dol- 
lars, when  they  went  to  Charles  Bispham,  Abraham  Brown,  and 
John  Dobbins,  and  asked  them  to  subscribe  but  five  hundred  or 
one  thousand  dollars.  They  replied,  their  reason  was  because  the 
liabiliiies  of  this  affirmant  for  the  Bishop  were  so  great,  and  that 
it  was  to  enable  him  to  pay  the  debts  that  this  affirmant  was  liable 
for.  Affirmant  then  said  he  did  not  consider  the  security  good 
but  he  would  consider  on  it.  In  a  few  days  after  this,  Bishop 
Doane  came  to  me  with  the  subscription  paper,  and  wanted  me 
to  sign  it,  and  said  that  Michael  Hays  had  subscribed  three  thou- 
sand dollars,  and  that  I  must  subscribe  the  same.  Affirmant  re- 
plied that  he  had  so  much  to  pay  in  Philadelphia  that  he  could 
not  pay  the  cash.  The  Bishop  then  said,  give  your  notes.  Af- 
firmant then  signed  five  promissory  notes,  of  six  hundred  dollars 
each,  the  first  note  payable  in  ninety  days,  with  interest  from  date, 
and  the  other  four  payable  at  the  expiration  of  each  of  the  next 
four  months  respectively,  with  interest  from  date,  and  handed 
them  to  the  Bishop,  and  told  him  he  must  not  part  with  them,  for 
I  would  settle  them  when  they  came  due.  The  Bishop  said  he 
would  not.  When  the  first  note  became  due,  affirmant  called  on 
Bishop  Doane  for  the  purpose  of  settling  it,  and  asked  him  if  the 
note  could  be  had.  He  said  he  thought  so,  when  at  the  same  time 
he  had  received  the  money  for  it,  and  had  passed  it  away,  and  I 
had  received  notice  for  the  payment  of  it,  from  Charles  M.  Har- 
ker,  of  Mount  Holly.  This  affirmant,  at  the  time  he  gave  the  said 
five  notes  of  six  hundred  dollars  each  to  Bishop  Doane,  had  in  his 
possession  notes  of  Bishop  Doane's,  to  the  amount  of  several  thou- 
sand dollars,  which  this  affirmant  had  indorsed  for  him,  and  which 
notes  had  been  protested,  and  this  affirmant  had  been  compelled 
to  pay;  and  which  last  mentioned  notes  this  affirmant  intended  to 
offset  against  his  five  notes  of  six  hundred  dollars  each,  which  he 
delivered  to  said  Bishop  Doane,  under  the  representation  made  to 
this  affirmant  by  Jeremiah  C.  Garthwaite  and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Ogilby, 
that  the  amount  subscribed  to  said  loan  of  $50,000,  of  which  the 
said  five  notes  of  six  hundred  dollars  each,  formed  a  part,  was  in- 
tended to  pay  notes  of  George  W.  Doane,  on  which  I  was  liable. 
But  the  said  notes  of  six  hundred  dollars  each,  so  delivered  by  me 
to  said  George  VV.  Doane,  were  not  appropriated  to  pay  other 
notes  on  which  I  was  liable,  as  endorser  or  otherwise  ;  but  in  con- 
sequence of  his  passing  them  away  for  other  purposes,  or  author- 


170 

izing  his  broker  to  sell  them,  in  violation  of  his  promise  to  keep 
them  himself,  this  affirmant  was  cheated  out  of  a  thousand  dollars, 
and  the  said  George  VV.  Doane  fraudulently  incurred  a  debt  to 
the  said  affirmant  of  three  thousand  dollars. 

And  this  affirmant  further  says,  there  were  several  other  in- 
dorsements of  notes  that  Bishop  Doane  obtained,  that  were  with- 
out date,  and  this  affirmant  believes  of  the  amount  of  one  thousand 
dollars.  These  indorsements  were  obtained  by  Bishop  Doane  from 
this  affirmant,  under  the  pretext  that  they  were  to  be  used  only  for 
renewals,  and  that  it  would  be  more  convenient  for  him  to  have 
the  indorsement  on  notes  in  blank,  or  without  date,  so  that  he  could 
fill  up  the  dates  at  the  times  when  the  notes,  which  they  were  in- 
tended to  renew,  should  fall  due;  and  this  affirmant,  relying  upon 
the  promise  of  the  said  George  VV.  Doane,  and  putting  confidence 
in  his  false  petexts,  indorsed  his  said  notes;  and  that  the  said 
George  W.  Doane,  in  fraud  and  violation  of  his  said  promises, 
used  the  said  one  thousand  dollar  notes  thus  obtained  for  other 
purposes  than  for  renewal  of  notes,  on  which  said  Joseph  Deacon 
was  indorser,  and  which  said  notes  were  protested,  and  this  affirm- 
ant has  been  compelled  to  pay  the  same,  whereby  the  said  George 
W.  Doane  has  fraudulently  contracted  a  further  debt,  and  in- 
curred an  obligation  to  the  additional  amount  of  several  thousand 
dollars. 

And  this  affirmant  further  says,  that  in  order  to  induce  this  af- 
firmant to  indorse  his  notes,  Bishop  Doane  repeatedly  wrote  to 
him,  this  affirmant,  that  his,  Bishop  Doane's  schools,  were  pros- 
perous, and  that  this  affirmant  should  not  lose  one  cent,  and  re- 
peatedly assured  him  verbally  of  the  same  thing.  At  last  I  told 
him  that  if  he  would  give  me  a  judgment  bond  for  the  amount  of  his 
indebtedness  to  me,  I  would  not  go  before  the  grand  jury  to  enter 
a  complaint  against  him,  and  the  Bishop  said  he  would;  this  was 
on  the  first  day  of  the  Court  at  Mount  Holly,  in  the  term  of  May, 
in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  fifty.  I 
had  previously,  and  in  the  preceding  February  term  of  the  said 
Court,  been  before  the  grand  jury  and  entered  a  complaint  against 
Bishop  Doane  for  obtaining  money  from  me  under  false  pretences  ; 
and  on  which  complaint  this  affirmant  has  been  informed  and  be- 
lieves the  grand  jury  of  Burlington  county  agreed  to  find  a  bill  of 
indictment,  but  which  vote  was  reconsidered  in  the  afternoon, 
and  the  complaint  laid  over  until  the  ensuing  May  term.  And 
after  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  on  the  said  first  day  of  the  ses- 
sion of  the  Court  at  Mount  Holly,  had  agreed  to  give  this  affirm- 
ant a  bond  with  warrant  of  attorney,  to  confess  judgment  for  the 
amount  of  his  indebtedness  to  this  affirmant,  this  affirmant  spoke 
to  Robert  f).  Spencer,  Esquire,  on  the  same  day,  and  requested 
him  to  draw  up  said  bond  and  warrant  of  attorney,  which  said 


171 

Robert  D.  Spencer  did ;  and  on  Wednesday,  the  second  day  of 
said  Court,  this  affirmant  took  the  said  bond  and  warrant  of  at- 
torney and  went  to  the  city  of  Burlington,  and  to  the  Bishop's 
house,  about  one  or  two  oclock  in  the  afternoon,  and  found  the 
Bishop,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Southard,  Mr.  Bradin,  and  another  per- 
son, talking  earnestly  together,  and  affirmant  told  the  Bishop  he 
wanted  to  speak  to  him.  "  To  me  !"  replied  the  Bishop,  speak- 
ing short,  and  seeming  to  be  in  a  passion  ;  affirmant  said  yes,  he 
did.  Affirmant  and  the  Bishop  then  went  througk  the  hall  into 
the  drawing-room ;  affirmant  then  said  he  had  brought  the  judg- 
ment bond  for  him  to  sign,  and  took  it  out  of  his  hat.  The  Bishop 
flew  in  a  passion,  and  said,  "  For  me  to  sign  ;  I  w i  1 1  do  no  such 
thing,  for  I  have  received  a  letter  from  Mr.  Stratton,  not  ten  min- 
utes ago,  saying  you  are  going  before  the  grand  jury."  The 
Bishop  then  shut  up  his  fist  and  reached  out  his  arm  towards  me, 
seemed  to  be  in  a  passion,  and  said,  "  I'll  kill  you  !  I'll  kill 
you  !"  he  repeated  it  twice.  This  affirmant  then  said  he  had  not 
been  before  the  grand  jury,  nor  had  he  been  subpoened  to  go  ; 
and  that  this  affirmant  had  promised  him  he  would  not  go,  and 
this  affirmant  did  not  then  expect  that  he  would  be  subpcened  or 
sent  for  to  go  before  the  grand  jury,  but  the  affirmant  was  after- 
wards sent  for  by  the  grand  jury  and  compelled  me  to  go. 

Burlington  County,  ss. 

Personally  appeared  before  me,  John'  Folwell,  one  of  the  justi- 
ces of  the  peace  in  and  for  the  county  of  Burlington,  Joseph  Dea- 
con, who  being  conscientiously  scrupulous  of  taking  an  oath, 
being  duly  affirmed  according  to  law,  upon  his  affirmation  saith, 
the  above  statement  is  true  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge  and 
belief. 

JOSEPH  DEACON. 
Affirmed  and  subscribed  the  29lh  day  > 

of  October,  1852,  before  me,  ) 

John  Folwell,  Justice. 


R2. 


Coj)y  of  Letters  to  Joseph  Deacon. 

"  Two  notes  with  your  endorsement  can  be  renewed  for  the 
whole  amount,  and  one  lor  half;  and  I  can  pay  them  at  their  ma- 
turity.    I  leave  them  with  Mr.  Germain  for  your  name. 

Faithfully  your  friend, 

G.  W.  DOANE." 
Riverside.. 


172 

My  Dear  Sir  : 

I  am  sorry  you  should  permit  yourself  to  write,  as  you  did,  to 
Mr.  Germain;  all  that  he  has  done,  he  has  done  for  me,  and  lie 
has  done  nothing  wrong.  Your  language  is  unjust,  and  I  am 
sure  that  you  regret  it  before  this. 

The  note  at  Camden  was  renewed,  although  the  President 
thought  it  would  not  be.     It  was  a  favor  to  me. 

The  note  which  G.  P.  Mitchell  had  was  one  obtained  for  re- 
newal, but  the  cash  paid  instead.  I  have  had  no  notes  from  you 
tor  a  long  time  but  for  renewal,  and  want  no  other. 

What  good  would  it  do  you,  if  you  could,  to  injure  our  busi- 
ness, by  hard  speeches.  We  wish  and  mean  to  pay  you.  You 
had  belter  help  than  hinder  us. 

There  are  certain  notes  falling  due.  They  can  be  renewed 
with  your  name.  In  due  time  they  will  be  paid.  You  will  not 
Jose  one  cent.  Will  you  aid  or  will  you  not  ?  If  you  will  not,  I 
cannot  help  it.     Every  note  renewed  shall  be  given  to  you. 

There  is  a  note  due  to  pay  at  the  Bank  here,  8750.  They  will 
renew  it,  or  nearly*  the  same  thing  in 

regard  to  them.     If  you  positively  refuse,  I  shall  have  to  let  the 
matters  be  as  they  are. 

All  the  checks  will  be  made  good  as  soon  as  possible. 

Very  trulv  your  friend, 

G.  W.  DOANE. 


S. 

Know  all  men  by  these  presents,  that  we,  George  Washington 
i  >oane  and  Augusta  C.  Winslow,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Bur- 
lington, in  the  state  of  New  Jersey,  are  held  and  do  stand  indebt- 
ed unto  his  Excellency  William  Bennington,  Governor  and  Sur- 
rogate General  of  the  state  of  New  Jersev,  in  the  sum  of  two 
thousand  dollars,  lawful  money  of  said  state,  to  be  paid  to  the 
said  William  Pennington,  his  successors  or  assigns;  to  which 
payment  well  and  truly  to  be  made  and  done,  we  bind  ourselves, 
our  heirs,  executors,  administrators,  and  every  of  them,  jointly 
and  severally,  firmly  by  these  presents. 

Sealed  with  our  seals  and  dated  the  twenty-seventh  day  of  Jan- 
uary, in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
forty-one. 

Whereas,  at  an  Orphans'  Court,  held  on  the  sixth  day  of  No- 
vemler  last,  at  Mount  Molly,  in  and  for  the  county  of  Burling- 
ton, the  above  bound  George  Washington  Donne  was  by  the 
Court  appointed  guardian   of  the  person  and   estate   of  George 

*  The  letter  torn  so  that  three  or  four  words  are  illegible. 


173 

Doane  Winslow,  a  minor,  under  the  age  of  fourteen  years,  child  of 
Benjamin  D.  Winslow,  upon  the  said  George  Washington  Doane 
entering  into  the  usual  bond  to  the  Ordinary  in  the  sum  of  two 
thousand  dollars,  with  Augusta  C.  Winslow,  of  the  city  and 
county  of  Burlington  and  Stale  of  New  Jersey,  as  surety. 

Now  the  condition  of  the  above  obligation  is  such,  that  if  the 
above  bound  George  W.  Doane  shall  faithfully  execute  his  ofFico 
as  guardian  of  the  person  and  estate  of  the  said  George  Doane 
Winslow,  then  this  obligation  to  be  void,  or  else  to  be  and  remain 
in  full  force  and  virtue. 

G.  W.  DOANE.  [l.  s.] 

AUGUSTA  G.  WINSLOW.   [l.  s.j 
Signed,  sealed  and  delivered  ) 
in  the  presence  of  ) 

Charles  Kixsey. 

I,  John  F.  Moore,  Surrogate  of  the  county  of  Burlington,  do 
certify  the  foregoing  to  be  a  true  copy  of  the  guardian  bond  of 
George  Washington  Dcane,  guardian  of  George  Doane  Wins- 
low, minor,  with  the  security  annexed,  as  filed  in  the  Surrogate's 
otlice  of  the  county  of  Burlington,  November  sixth,  A.  D.  eighteen 
hundred  and  fort  v. 

Witness  my  hand  and   seal   of  office,  the  eighth  day  of 
[l.  s.]         September,  in   the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  fifty-three. 

JOHNF.  MOORE. 


t: 

BURLINGTON  CIRCUIT  COURT. 

Michael  Hays,      ") 

v.  \  In  case.     On  judgment,  SfC. 

Reuben  J.  Germain.  ) 

Examination  of  the  above  named  defendant,  taken  bell  re  me  a: 
my  office,  in  the  city  of  Trenton,  on  the  twenty-first  day  <  f  Janu- 
ary, A.  D.,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-three,  in  pursuant  e  of  an 
order  for  that  purpose,  made  by  Hon.  Stacy  G.  Potts,  Judge  of 
said  court.  Taken  in  the  presence  of  William  Ha  Is  ted,  Esq.,  at- 
torney for  plaintiff,  and  c  f  the  plaintiff  himself,  and  John  L.  N. 
Stratton,  Esq.,  of  couni       .     h  the  defendant,  Reuben  J.  Germain. 

J.  WILSON,  Commissioner 
for  taking  bail,  fyc ,  in  Supreme  Court  cf  New  Jersey. 

Reuben  J.  Germain,  the  above  named  defendant,  being  by  mo 
duly  sworn  according  to  law,  on  his  oath  saith.     My  father  anc. 


174 

I  together  owned  a  farm,  before  the  purchase  of  the  farm  just 
mentioned  above.  That  is,  we  owned  it  in  the  same  way  we 
owned  this  one.  We  were  to  pay  five  thousand  dollars  for  that, 
and  did  pay  five  thousand  dollars  eventually.  We  sold  that.  It 
was  in  the  winter  of  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-eight,  I 
think.     It  might  have  been  at  the  close  of  the  vear  eighteen  hun- 

CD  •<  CD 

dred  and  forty-seven.  The  papers  were  not  executed  till  March 
the  second,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-eight.  We  got  ten  thou- 
sand  dollars  for  that.  The  consideration  money  was  paid  into  my 
hands.  That  money  was  loaned  to  Bishop  Doane.  It  remained 
in  my  hands  for  a  few  weeks,  till  the  time  should  come  for  it  to 
be  used,  and  while  it  was  in  my  hands,  I  loaned  it  to  Bishop 
Doane.  That  money  which  I  loaned  to  Bishop  Doane  has  not 
been  repaid  to  me.  Two  thousand  dollars  of  it  was  repaid  to  my 
lather  on  the  second  day  of  March,  A.  D.,  eighteen  hundred  and 
forty-eight.  There  still  remains  due  from  Bishop  Doane,  four 
thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen  dollars  and  eight  cents.  Tha 
is  the  sum  due  on  the  obligation.  There  is  none  of  that  sum  due 
to  me.  That  obligation  is  now  held  by  the  assignees.  I  think  I 
-placed  that  obligation  in  the  hands  of  the  assignees.  It  was  paya- 
ble to  me.  That  obligation  was  given  at  the  time  I  lent  him  the 
money.  The  amount  due  on  the  obligation  at  the  time  it  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  the  assignees,  as  far  as  I  now  know,  was 
live  thousand  nine  hundred  and  seventy  dollars  and  fifty-four 
cents.  1  received  two  dividends  upon  it  from  the  assignees,  which 
reduced  the  amount  to  four  thousand  nine  hundred  and  fifteen  dol- 
lars and  eight  cents,  the  amount  mentioned.  Bishop  Doane  is  now 
indebted  to  me  besides  that  amount.  He  owes  me  in  addition  to 
that,  something  like  two  thousand  dollars,  altogether.  It  has  been 
contracted  at  various  periods  during  the  last  ten  or  twelve  years. 
This  additional  sum  of  two  thousand  dollars  was  due  at  the  time 
of  Bishop  Doane's  assignment. 


u. 

Rev.  George  W.  Doane  ) 
to  > 

Rev.  William  Chester.  > 
Abstract  of  a  mortgage  from  the  Right  Reverend  George 
Washington  Doane,  D.  D.,  L.  L.  D.,  of  the  city  of  Burlington,  in 
1  he  state  of  New  Jersey,  and  Eliza  G.  his  wifej  to  the  Reverend 
William  Chester,  of  the  said  city  of  Burlington,  Doctor  of  Divin- 
it yf  dated  the  twenty-sixth  day  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
one  thousand  eight  hundred   and  forty-six,  (18-10)  to  secure  the 


175 

payment  of  two  thousand  five  hundred  dollars,  lawful  money  of 
the   United   States  of  America,  as  follows  :  Eight  hundred  and 
fifty  dollars  on  the   first  day  of  June,  A.  D.  one  thousand   eight 
hundred  and  forty-seven;  eight   hundred  and   fifty  dollars  on  the 
first  day  of  June,  A.  D.  one  thousand   eight  hundred  and   forty- 
eight ;  and  eight  hundred   dollars  on  the  first  day  of  June,  A.  D. 
one  thousand  eight  hundred   and  forty-nine,  with   lawful  interest 
from  the  first  day  of  June  next  ensuing  the  date   hereof,  payable 
semi-annually  on   the   first  day  of  December  and  June  of  each 
year,  all  that  certain  lot,  piece  or  parcel  of  land,  situate  on  the 
southwardly  side  of  Pearl  street,  to  the  westward  of  Ellis  street, 
in  the  cily  of  Burlington  aforesaid,  bounded  as  follows,  viz.:  be- 
ginning on  the  south  side  of  Pearl  street,  at  the  east  corner  on 
said  street,  of  a  lot  conveyed  bv  the  said  Dr.  William  Chester  to 
Dr.  Cortlandt  Van  Renssalear,  and  runs  thence,  1st,  southwardly 
-at  right  angles  to  said  Pearl  street  three  hundred  and  five  feet  to 
his  corner;  2d,  westward!}'  along   his  line   parallel   with   Pearl 
street  four  hundred  and  sixty-seven  feet  ten   inches  to  his  corner 
in  east  line  of  Mrs.  Rebecca  Chester's  lot ;  3d,  south  thirteen  de- 
grees east  eleven  chains  and  six  links  to  her  corner  in  the  north- 
wardlv  edge   of  the   Camden   and    Ambov  Railroad;  4th,  north 
seventy-two  degrees  and  thirty  minutes  east  along  the  said  Rail- 
road  land  five  chains  and   sixty  links  to  Joseph   Askew's  corner; 
5th,  north  nineteen  degrees  east  along  the  line  of  said  lot  and  land 
held  in  trust  by  Frederick  Brown,  nine   chains  and   fifty  links  to 
his  corner;  6th,  north  thirteen  degrees  east  four  chains  and  nine- 
teen links  to  another  corner;  7tR,  north  twelve  degrees  west  four 
chains  and  fiftv-seven  links  to  another  corner  of  said  Brown's,  in 
the  edge  of  Pearl  street  aforesaid  ;  8th,  wrestwardly  along  Pearl 
street  three  hundred  and   ninety  feet  to  the  place  of  beginning, 
containing  twelve  acres  and  sixty-four  hundredths  of  an  acre,  be 
the  same  more  or  less;  being  the  same  premises  that  the  said 
William  Chester.  D.  D.,  and  Francis  Mary,  his  wife,  granted  and 
conveyed  to  the  said  Right  Reverend  George  Washington  Doane, 
D.  D.  and  L.  L.  D.,  in  fee,  by  indenture,  bearing  date  the  twen- 
tieth day  of  April,  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-six,  and 
to  be  forthwith  recorded,  together  &c. 
Recorded  June  30th,  A.  D.,  1846. 

JAMES  ROGERS,  Cl'k. 


V. 

REAL  ESTATE  LATE  OF  GEORGE  W.  DOANE. 

No.  1.  Lot  of  land  and  buildings  thereon,  known  as  St.  Mary's 
Hall,  bounded  by  Ellis  street,  Pearl  street,  the  river,  and  Riverside, 


176 

conveyed  to  G.  W.  Doane  by  Garret  D.  Wall  and  others,  March 
12,  1817. 

No.  2.  Riverside,  bounded  by  the  river,  St.  Mary's  Hall,  Pearl 
street  and  Reed  street. 

No.  3.  A  farm  containing  twelve  acres,  more  or  less,  lying  be- 
tween the  College  and  the  Railroad. 

No.  4.  A  lot  of  pasture  ground,  near  London  Bridge  Creek. 

Nos.  5,  6  and  7.  Three  lots,  fifty  feet  each,  on  Pearl  street,  in 
the  rear  of  Burlington  College. 

State  of  New  Jersey,  > 

/  ss 
Burlington  county,      $ 

1,  Joseph  F.  Burr,  Clerk  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  and 
Circuit  Court  of  the  county  of  Burlington,  do  hereby  certify  that 
I  have  examined  the  records  of  my  office,  for  mortgages  and 
judgments,  remaining  uncancelled  against  George  W.  Doane,  and 
find  none  except  as  follows :. 

mortgages. 

1847,  March  15.  To  Joseph  Deacon,  on  lot  No.  1,  for  $3,000.00 
1817,  April  15.     To  Isaac  B.  Parker  and  aid,  on  the 

same,  13,500.00 

1829,  April  1.  I  also  find  a  mortgage  on  said  No.  1, 

by  Samuel  R.  Gummere,  a  former  owner,. to  Griffith 

Evans,  for  8,000.00 

1838,  April  2.  George   W.  Doane.  to  Joseph  Deacon, 

on  No.  2,  for  5,000.00 

1838,  September  19.  To  Henrv  R.  Cleveland,  on  l^o. 

2,  for  15,000.00 

1846,  May  26.  To  Rev.  William  Chester,  on  No.  3,  for     2,500.00 

1847,  March  11.  To  Sarah  C.  Robardet,  on  No.  3,  for  3,000.00 
1811,  May  15.  To  Mary  Vandegrift,  on  No.  4,  for  1 13.33 

To  Isaac  B.  Parker  and  alii,  on  all 

judgments  v.  George  W.  Doane,  for  50,000.00 

1819,   August  21.    Lawson   Carter    vs.   George    \V. 

Doane  and  Reuben  J.  Germain,  for  10,200.29 

with  costs  of  suit. 

In  the  margin  of  this  record  is  an  entrv  bv  plaintiff's 
atiornev,  statins  that  Germain  is   released   from    this 
judgment.     Dated  June  20,  1851. 
1852,  Dec'r  28.     Samuel   C.  Atkinson   v.  George    \V. 

Doane,  for  242. 1 G 

In  testimony  whereof  I  have  set  my  hand  and  seals 
[l.  s.]  [l.  s.]      of  said  Courts  hereto,  this  tenth  day  of  Septem- 
ber, A.  D.  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-three. 

JOSEPH  F.  BURR,  Clerk. 


177 

W. 

EXTRACT  FROM  RECORD. 

Suffolk,  ss.  Supreme  Judicial  Court. 

To  the  Honorable  the  Justices  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court  of 

the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts,  setting  in  Equity,  within 

and  for  the  county  of  Suffolk. 

Humbly  complaining  show  unto  your  orators,  Thomas  H.  Per- 
kins and  William  H.  Gardiner,  both  of  Boston,  in  the  county  of 
Suffolk,  Esquires,  that  James  Perkins,  late  of  said  Boston,  mer- 
chant, deceased,  on  the  fourth  day  of  March,  in  the  year  of  our 
Lord  eighteen  hundred  and  twenty-five,  made  his  last  will  and 
testament,  which,  together  with  a  certain  other  instrument,  made 
by  him  as  a  codicil  thereto,  bearing  date  thirtieth  day  of  Janu- 
ary, eighteen  hundred  and  twenty-eight,  was  duly  proved,  ap- 
proved and  allowed,  as  the  last  will  and  testament  of  the  said 
James  Perkins,  by  the  Judge  of  Probate  for  the  said  county  of 
Suffolk,  on  the  twenty-first  day  of  July,  eighteen  hundred  and 
twenty-eight,  and  your  orators  offer  to  produce  duly  attested 
copies  of  the  said  will  and  codicil,  and  of  the  decree  of  Probate 
thereon,  and  craving  leave  to  refer  to  the  same,  for  greater  certain- 
ty, they  aver  that  the  second  item  of  said  will  is  in  the  words 
following,  that  is  to  say:  "Item  second — I  give  to  my  wife  Eliza 
Greene  Perkins,  the  yearly  sum  of  six  thousand  dollars,  to  be  paid 
to  her  quarter  yearly,  commencing  from  my  decease,  and  to  con- 
tinue during  her  natural  life  ;  and  I  do  hereby  authorize  and  di- 
rect my  executors  to  retain  in  their  hands,  for  the  purpose  of  pay- 
ing said  annuity,  so  much  of  my  estate,  either  in  money  or  stocks, 
as  bein£  invested  and  managed  in  the  manner  hereinafter  direct- 
ed,  will  produce  the  yearly  income  of  six  thousand  dollars,  after 
paying  all  charges." 

And  your  orators  further  allege,  that  the  same  testator,  in  and 
by  his  said  will,  nominated,  constituted  and  appointed  your  ora- 
tors, the  said  Thomas  H.  Perkins  and  William  H.  Gardiner,  to- 
gether with  Samuel  G.  Perkins,  late  of  Brookline,  in  the  county 
of  Norfolk,  merchant,  deceased,  the  executors  of  and  trustees 
under  the  said  last  will  and  codicil,  in  all  cases  of  trust  thereby  crea- 
ted ;  and  your  orators  further  say,  that  they,  the  said  Thomas  H. 
Perkins,  Samuel  G.  Perkins  and  William  H.  Gardiner,  did  accept 
said  trusts  and  were  duly  qualified  to  act  as  the  executors  of  the 
said  will  and  codicil,  and  afterwards  duly  settled  their  accounts 
in  that  capacity  with  the  said  Judge  of  Probate,  and  thereupon 
became  and  were  duly  appointed  to  act  as  trustees  under  the  said 
will  and  codicil,  and  have  from  time  to  time  duly  accounted  with 
the  said  Judge  of  Probate  in  that  capacity,  and  from  :he  time  of  the 

M 


178 

Probate  of  said  will  until  the  decease  of  the  said  Samuel  G.  Per- 
kins, in  the  year  they  continued  to  act  either  as  executors 
or  as  trustees  under  said  will,  and  from  the  decease  of  the  said 
Samuel  G.,  hitherto  the  said  Thomas  H.  Perkins  and  William  II. 
Gardiner  have  continued  to  act  and  are  still  acting  in  the  perfor- 
mance of  the  duties  as  surviving  trustees  under  the  same.  And 
your  orators  further  show,  that  said  Eliza  Green  Perkins,  after 
the  death  of  said  testator,  intermarried  with  the  Rt.  Rev.  Geo. 
W.  Doane,  of  Burlington,  in  the  State  of  New  Jersey,  and  that 
they  are  both  still  living  at  said  Burlington. 

And  your  orators  further  show,  that  said  testator  left  at  his  de- 
cease  the  following  named  children  of  himself  and  his  said  wife, 
namely:  Edward  N.  Perkins,  of  Roxbury,  in  the  county  of  Nor- 
folk, Charles  Callahan  Perkins,  of  said  Boston,  Sarah  P.  Cleve- 
land, of  said  Boston,  widow  of  Henry  11.  Cleveland,  late  of  Cam- 
bridge, in  the  county  of  Middlesex,  deceased,  all  of  whom  have 
attained  the  age  of  twenty-one  years,  and  James  II.  Perkins,  late 
of  Boston,  deceased,  without  issue,  testate,  having  attained  the 
age  of  twenty-one  years  and  having  appointed  James  K.  Mills 
and  John  Parsons,  of  said  Boston,  Esquires,  executors  and  trus- 
tees of  his  last  will  and  testament  duly  proved  and  allowed,  and 
whereof  your  orators  offer  to  produce  a  duly  attested  copy, 
whereby  the  said  Mills  and  Parsons  having  accepted  the  said 
trusts,  and  having  been  duly  qualified  to  execute  the  same,  be- 
came the  successors  and  representatives  of  said  James  II.  Perkins 
in  respect  to  his  reversionary  rights  in  the  trust  fund  held  by  your 
orators.  And  your  orators  further  show,  that  they,  the  said 
Thomas  H.  Perkins,  Samuel  G.  Perkins  aud  William  IJL  Gardi- 
ner, acting  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  authority  and  discretion 
reposed  in  them  by  said  will  and  codicil,  and  holding  and  manag- 
ing all  the  property  and  funds  which  came  to  their  hands  until 
the  setting  apart  of  particular  portions  thereof,  hereinafter  men- 
tioned, have  constantly  since  the  death  of  said  testator  and  until 
the  time  of  setting  apart  of  the  special  funds,  hereinafter  men- 
tioned, regularly  paid  to  said  Eliza  Green  Perkins,  now  E.  G. 
Doane,  personally  or  upon  her  separate  order,  ihe  said  annuity  of 
six  thousand  dollars,  by  regular  quarterly  payments,  as  directed 
by  said  will,  out  of  the  income  derived  from  said  property  as 
aforesaid. 

And  your  orators  further  show,  that  t ho  said  Thomas  II.  Per- 
kins, Samuel  G.  Perkins  and  William  II.  Gardiner,  heretofore  in 
tfie  lifetime  of  the  said  Samuel  G.,  by  virtue  of  the  authority  and 
discretion  reposed  in  them  by  said  will  and  said  codicil,  heretofore  on 
the  31st  day  of  January,  1838,  did  set  apart  out  of  the  estate  and 
property  of  the  testator,  devised  and  bequeathed  to  them  in  trust, 
as  aforesaid,  such   parts  oi  portions   thereof  as  in  their  judgment 


179 

were  sufficient  to  secure  the  regular  payment  to  the  said  Eliza 
Green  Perkins,  now  E.  G.  Doane,  during  her  life,  the  said  annui- 
ty of  six  thousand  dollars,  in  equal  quarterly  payments,  and  have 
since  said  time  up  to  the  time  when  the  last  quarterly  payment 
thereof  became  due  and  payable,  namely,  the  first  day  of  Octo- 
ber, now  last  past,  regularly  paid  to  her  personally  or  upon  her 
separate  written  order,  the  said  annuity,  in  equal  quarterly  pay- 
ments as  aforesaid.  And  your  orators  well  hoped  that  they  would 
have  been  enabled  to  continue  to  pay  the  said  annuity  in  manner 
aforesaid  during  the  life  of  said  Eliza  Green  Perkins,  according 
to  the  provisions  of  said  will,  free  from  the  control  or  interference 
of  any  person  or  persons  whatever,  and  without  embarrassment 
from  the  adverse  claims  of  any  other  person  or  persons  thereto, 
or  to  any  part  or  portion  thereof. 

But  now   so  it  is,  may  it  please  your  Honors,   that   the  said 
George  YV.  Doane,  since  his  intermarriage  with  the  said  Eliza  G. 
Perkins,  has  failed  and   become  insolvent   and   unable  to  pay  his 
just  debts,  and  being  so  insolvent,  one  Michael  Hays,  of  said  Bur- 
lington, alleging  himself  to  be  a  creditor  of  the  said  George  W. 
Doane,  claims  to  receive  of  your  orators,  as  such  surviving  trus- 
tees under  said  will,  the  sum  of  one   thousand  dollars,  which  he 
alleges  was  due  and  payable  to   him   on  the  first  day  of  January 
now  last  past,  and   interest  thereon  ;  and  the  further  sum  of  one 
thousand  dollars  annually,  with  interest,  on  each  succeeding  first 
day  of  January,  for  a  series  of  years,  out  of  the  said   annuity  so 
payable  to   said  Eliza  G.  Doane,   by  virtue  of  a   certain  assign- 
ment or  agreement  which  the  said   Hays  alleges  to  have  been 
made   between  him  and  the  said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  and  of  a  cer- 
t  i in  power  of  attorney  which   he  alleges  to  have  been  executed 
and  delivered  by  said   Eliza  G.  Doane  to  him  the  said  Hays,  the 
which  said   assignment  or  agreement  is,  as   he  alleges,  in   the 
words,  or  to  the  effect  following : 

"Articles  of  agreement  had,  made,  concluded  and  agreed  upon 
ihis  twentieth  dav  of  August,  in  the  year  ef  our  Lord  one  thou- 
sand  eight  hundred  and  forty-nine,  between  Mrs.  Eliza  G.  Doane, 
of  the  city  of  Burlington,  county  of  Burlington,  and  state  of  New 
Jersey,  of  the  one  part,  and  Michael  Hays,  of  the  township  of 
Burlington,  county  and  state  aforesaid,  of  the  other  part :  VVit- 
nesseth,  that  whereas  the  said  Michael  Hays  has  incurred  exten- 
sive liabilities  by  means  of  numerous  endorsements  upon  notes 
drawn  bv  mv  husband,  Rt.  Rev.  Geo.  \V.  Doane.  and  suits  of 
law  have  already  been  commenced  against  the  said  Hays  to  re- 
rover  of  him  the  amounts  dwe  on  such  notes;  now,  therefore,  in 
consideration  that  the  said  Michael  Hays  shall  effect  a  settlement 
with  the  note  holders  of  the  emire  amount  due  on  the  notes  afore- 
said, upon  such  terms  as  can  be  agreed  upon,  and  in  such  man- 
ner as  that  such  settlement  shall  operate  in  the   discontinuance  of 


180 

the  suits  at  law,  as  aforesaid,  commenced  against  him  ;  I,  the 
said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  do  agree  therefore  to  transfer  and  set  over 
to  the  said  Michael  Hays,  on  the  tenth  day  of  January  next  en- 
suing the  date  of  this  agreement,  and  upon  that  day  in  each  and 
every  year  thereafter,  until  the  sum  hereinafter  specified  has  been 
paid,  all  the  right,  title  and  interest  1  possess  in  one  thousand  dol- 
lars, together  with  the  interest,  hereinafter  mentioned,  part  of  the 
vearlvT  income  of  which  I  am  entitled  under  and  bv  virtue  of  the 
provisions  of  the  last  will  and  testament  of  my  late  husband, 
James  Perkins.  The  said  one  thousand  dollars  to  be  paid  each 
and  every  year  hereafter  as  aforesaid,  until  such  sum  has  been 
paid  as  will,  in  the  whole,  amount  to  one  half  of  such  sum  as  the 
said  Michael  Hays  shall  be  required  to  pay  upon  the  terms  of  the 
settlement  above  alluded  to,  including  the  entire  costs  he  shall  be 
called  upon  to  pay  in  obtaining  the  discontinuance  of  said  suits,  and 
in  addition  to  the  same,  the  interest,  at  six  'per  cent,  per  annum, 
upon  the  balance  of  such  moiety  aforesaid,  as  remains  each  and 
every  year  after  the  payment  of  the  said  one  thousand  dollars  ; 
and  the  said  Michael  Havs  does  agree  to  use  all  due  diligence, 
and  make  every  reasonable  effort  in  effecting  said  compromise 
or  settlement  above  alluded  to;  provided  always,  nevertheless, 
that  it  is  understood  by  and  between  the  parties  to  this  agree- 
ment, that  the  said  Michael  Havs  is  not  obligated  thereby  to 
make  settlement  of  any  suit  or  suits,  when  the  defence  he  may 
have  to  make  rests  wholly  and  entirely  upon  legal  objections  to 
the  deficiency  of  notices  served  upon  him,  as  indorser,  but  the 
said  Michael  Hays  has  full  power  to  contest  said  suit  or  suits,  if 
he  shall  deem  it  necessary  and  proper  so  to  do. 

And  in  order  that  the  stipulations  contained  in  this  agreement 
may  be  the  better  carried  out  and  completed,  the  said  Eliza  G. 
Doane  does  agree  to  give  to  the  said  Michael  Hays,  immediately 
upon  the  settlement  of  the  suits  aforesaid,  a  power  of  attorney, 
authorizing  him  to  receive  the  said  one  thousand  dollars  yearly 
and  every  year,  together  with  interest  aforesaid,  from  the  execu- 
tors of  the  will  of  my  late  husband,  James  Perkins,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  terms  of  this  agreement  hereinbefore  stated. 

In  witness  whereof,  the  said  parties  have  hereunto  set  their 
hands  and  seals,  the  day  and  vear  first  above  mentioned. 

(Signed,)  ELIZA  G.  DOANE. 

MICHAEL  HAYS. 

In  presence  of 
James  W.  Wall. 

I  do  hereby  consent  that  my  wife,  Eliza  G.  Doane,  shall  sign 
and  execute  the  above  agreement. 

(Signed,,)  G.  W.  DOANE." 

Witness  present, 
James  W.  Wall, 


181 

And  the  said  power  of  attorney  is,  as  said  Hays  alleges,  in  tiie 
words  or  to  the  effect  following,  viz  : 

Whereas,  by  certain  articles  of  agreement,  made  and  conclu- 
ded between  myself,  Eliza  G.  Doane,  of  the  city  of  Burlington, 
county  of  Burlington  and  state  of  New  Jersey,  of  the  one  part, 
and  Michael  Hays,  of  the  township  of  Burlington,  county  and 
state  aforesaid,  of  the  other  part,  dated  the  twentieth  day  of 
August,  in  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-nine,  for  a  good 
and  valuable  consideration  therein  expressed,  I  did  agree  to  trans- 
fer and  set  over  to  the  said  Michael  Hays,  on  the  tenth  day  of 
January,  in  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty,  and  on  each  and 
every  year  thereafter,  all  the  right,  title  and  interest  I  possess  in 
one  thousand  dollars,  (together  with  the  interest  hereinafter  men- 
tioned,) part  of  the  yearly  income  to  which  I  am  entitled  in  my 
sole  and  separate  right,  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  last  will  and 
testament  of  my  late  husband,  James  Perkins,  of  the  city  of  Bos- 
ton, and  state  of  Massachusetts. 

The  said  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  and  interest  hereinafter 
mentioned,  to  be  paid  on  said  tenth  day  of  January  in  each  and 
every  year  thereafter,  until  such  sum  has  been  paid  as  the  whole 
would  amount  to,  one  moiety  of  the  sum  which  the  said  Michael 
Hays  should  be  required  to  pay  in  effecting  a  settlement  with 
creditors  upon  certain  suits  of  law  commenced  against  him,  in 
addition  to  such  interest  and  costs  as  said  Hays  should  be  called 
upon  to  pay  in  obtaining  a  settlement  and  discontinuance  thereof: 
together  with  the  interest,  at  six  per  cent,  per  annum,  upon  the 
balance  of  such  moiety,  as  aforesaid,  remaining,  each  and  even- 
year  after  the  payment  of  the  said  one  thousand  dollars,  with  in- 
terest. And  whereas,  I  did  further  a^ree,  in  order  to  carry  out 
the  stipulations  contained  in  said  agreement,  to  give  to  the  said  Mi- 
chael Hays,  immediately  upon  the  settlement  of  the  suits  afore- 
said, a  power  of  attorney  authorizing  him  to  receive  the  said  sum 
of  one  thousand  dollars,  with  interest,  on  the  tenth  day  of  Janu- 
ary, in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
fifty,  and  a  like  sum  in  each  and  every  year  thereafter,  together 
with  the  interest  on  the  balance  as  aforesaid,  in  accordance  with 
the  agreement  aforesaid,  and  subject  to  its  limitations.  And  inas- 
much as  the  said  Michael  Hays  has  this  day  presented  to  me  sat- 
isfactory evidence  that  such  settlement  above  alluded  to  has  been 
effected  ;  and  that  in  effecting  said  settlement,  he,  the  said  Hays, 
has  actually  paid  the  sum  of  twenty  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
eighteen  dollars. 

Now,  therefore,  know  all  men  by  these  presents,  That  T,  Eliza 
G.  Doane,  of  the  city  of  Burlington,  county  of  Burlington,  and 
state  of  New  Jersey,  do  hereby  appoint  the  said  Michael  Hays 
my  true  and  lawful  attorney,  in  my  name,  and  to  his  own  proper 


182 

use  arid  control,  to  receive  from  the  surviving  executors  of  the 
last  will  and  testament  of  my  late  husband,  James  Perkins,  on  the 
tenth  day  of  January,  in  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty,  one 
thousand  dollars,  with  interest,  and  the  like  sum  of  one  thousand 
dollars,  with  interest,  on  the  same  day  each  and  every  year  there- 
after, part  of  my  said  yearly  income,  until  such  sum  has  been  re- 
ceived as  in  the  whole  will  amount  to  the  said  sum  of  ten  thou- 
sand four  hundred  and  nine  dollars,  together  with  the  interest,  at 
six  per  cent.,  upon  such  balance  as  shall  remain  on  each  and  ev- 
ery year  after  the  payment  of  said  one  thousand  dollars  as  afore- 
said, and  to  do  all  lawful  acts  requisite  for  effecting  the  premises, 
and  in  case  of  the  decease  of  the  said  Michael  Hays,  before  the 
entire  amount  of  ten  thousand  four  hundred  and  nine  dollars, 
above  alluded  to,  has  been  paid,  then  I  do  hereby  constitute  and 
appoint  the  executor  or  executors,  administrator  or  administra- 
tors of  the  said  Michael  Mays,  my  true  and  lawful  attorney  or 
attorneys,  in  my  name,  but  for  the  use  and  benefit  of  the  estate 
of  the  sakl  Michael  Plays,  to  ask,  demand  and  receive  of  and 
from  the  surviving  executors  aforesaid  the  said  sum  of  one  thou- 
sand dollars,  together  with  the  interest,  above  alluded  to,  and 
upon  receipt  thereof  by,  or  payment  thereof  to,  my  said  attorney 
or  attorneys,  a  general  release  or  discharge  for  the  same  to  make, 
execute  and  deliver.  Hereby  ratifying,  confirming  and  allowing 
what  my  said  attorney  or  attorneys  shall  do  in  the  premises. 

In  testimony  whereof,  I  have  hereunto  set  my  hand  and  affixed 
my  seal,  this  thirteenth  day  of  October,  in  the  year  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  forty-nine. 

(Signed,)  ELIZA  G.  DOANE. 

Witness  present, 

Sarah  P.  Cleveland. 

And  the  said  Hays  alleges  that  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars, 
due  to  him,  as  he  alleges,  by  virtue  of  the  said  instruments,  on  the 
tentli  day  of  January,  in  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty,  was 
thereafter  paid  to  him  by  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  and  that  a 
like  sum  due  to  him,  as  he  alleges,  on  the  tenth  day  of  January, 
eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-one,  with  interest,  according  to  the 
tenor  of  the  said  alleged  instruments,  as  still  due  and  unpaid  ;  and 
on  or  about  the  first  day  of  October,  now  last  past,  he  demanded 
payment  thereof  from  your  orators,  out  of  the  quarterly  payment 
'>f  the  said  annuity  then  accruing  to  the  said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  and 
still  demands  the  same,  and  threatens  to  bring  a  suit  at  law  against 
your  orators  to  compel  the  payment  thereof. 

And  your  orators  further  show,  that  they  are  wholly  ignorant 
whether  any  such  assignment  or  power  of  attorney  as  above  set 
forth,  were,  in  fact,  executed  and  delivered  by  said  Eliza  G. 


183 

Doane,  and  they  pray  that  said  Hays,  if  he  relies  thereon,  may  be 
held  to  produce  and  prove  the  execution  of  the  same,  provided 
they  shall  otherwise  appear  to  your  honors  to  be  of  any  force  or 
validity  at  law  or  in  equity. 

And  your  orators  further  show,  that  they  have  been  informed, 
and  believe,  and  therefore  aver  the  fact  to  be,  that  if  the  said 
agreement  and  power  of  attorney  were  in  fact  executed  and  de- 
livered by  said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  (which  your  orators  do  not  ad- 
mil)  the  same  were  given  for  an  usurious  consideration,  and  for 
the  purpose  of  securing  to  said  Hays  the  repayment  of  money 
advanced  to  said  George  W.  Doane,  upon  a  contract  or  contracts, 
whereon  there  was  taken  and  reserved,  or  agreed  to  be  taken  and 
reserved,  a  greater  rate  of  interest  upon  all  moneys  advanced  to 
said  George  W.  Doane,  or  paid  to  his  use  by  said  Hays,  or  by 
lenders  of  the  moneys  upon  discounted  notes,  than  is  allowed  by 
law  in  the  state  of  New  Jersey,  where  said  contracts  were  made; 
and  vour  orators  being  so  advised,  insist  that  said  loans  and  said 
agreements  and  power  of  attorney  to  secure  the  repayment  there- 
of were,  and  thereby  are  wholly  null  and  void  in  law  and  in  equity, 
by  the  laws  of  the  said  state  of  New  Jersey,  and  consequently  by 
the  laws  of  this  commonwealth,  and  are  of  no  force  or  effect, 
either  as  against  your  orators  or  said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  or  as 
creating  any  lien  upon  or  claim  to  said  trust  fund  and  annuity,  or 
any  part  thereof  capable  of  being  enforced  either  at  law  or  in 
equity. 

And  vour  orators  being  so  advised,  further  insist  and  aver  that 
said  agreement  and  power  of  attorney  do  not  create,  constitute  or 
secure  any  legal  or  valid  claim,  interest  or  lien,  in  or  upon  the  said 
trust  funds,  and  said  annuity,  or  any  portion  thereof;  and  that  the 
said  trustees  cannot  be  compelled  to  pay  over  the  sums  named  in 
said  agreement  and  power  of  attorney,  or  any  of  them,  to  said 
Hays,  or  any  persons  claiming  under  him,  inasmuch  as  the  said 
Eliza  G.  Doane,  being  a  feme  covert,  could  not  lawfully  make 
such  contracts  and  deeds,  nor  otherwise  assign  by  anticipation  a 
portion  of  her  said  annuity,  and  that  the  same  being  made  for  the 
purpose  of  paying  the  debts  of  her  husband,  by  his  advice  and  di- 
rection, were  contrary  to  the  intent  and  legal  effect  of  said  will, 
and  of  no  force  or  validity  at  law  or  in  equity. 

And  your  orators  further  show  to  this  honorable  court,  that  the 
last  quarterly  payment  of  said  annuity,  which  became  due  and 
payable  on  the  first  day  of  October,  now  last  past,  being  claimed 
of  your  orators  by  said  Hays,  under  the  said  alleged  agreement 
and  power  of  attorney,  was  also  claimed  of  your  orators  by  said 
Edward  N.  Perkins,  for  the  benefit  of  said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  or 
otherwise  under  a  separate  order  in  writing,  signed  by  said  Eliza 
G.  Doane,  in  the  words  and  figures  following: 


184 

',  t  Executors  of  the  will  of  the  late  James 

W.  H.  Gardiner,  Esq'rs.  )  '       L' 

Pay  to  the  order  of  G.  W.  Doane,  fifteen  hundred  dollars,  being 
a  quarterly  payment  of  my  annuity  under  the  said  will,  due  this 
dav. 

ELIZA  G.  DOANE. 
Burlington,  October  1,  1851. 
Pay  to  the  order  of  E.  N.  Perkins,  Esq. 

G.  W.  DOANE. 

And  your  orators,  in  consequence  of  the  adverse  claims  of  said 
Hays  and  said  Edward  N.  Perkins,  and  by  reason  of  their  doubts 
of  the  validity  of  said  claims,  respectfully  declined  making  any 
payment  to  either  of  said  claimants  of  the  said  sum  of  fifteen  hun- 
dred dollars,  or  of  any  part  thereof,  which  was  due  and  payable 
to  the  said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  on  and  after  the  said  first  day  of  Oc- 
tober, now  last  past,  under  and  pursuant  to  the  provisions  of  said 
will,  and  vour  orators  still  retain  the  said  sum  in  their  hands,  sub- 
ject  to  the  directions  of  ibis  honorable  court,  concerning  the  duty 
of  your  orators  in  the  premises. 

T.  H.  PERKINS, 
W.  H.  GARDINER. 
Bv  W.  H.  Gardiner. 
C.  G.  Ripley,  Solicitor. 
Filed  Jan.  5,  1852. 

Attest :  G.  C.  WILDE,  Clerk. 

COMMONWEALTH  OF  MASSACHUSETTS. 

Clerk's  Office,  ^ 

Supreme  Judicial  Court.  £ 
Suffolk,  ss. 

I,  George  C.  Wilde,  Clerk  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court,  with- 
in and  for  said  county  of  Suffolk,  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing 
is  a  true  copy  of  the  bill  in  equity,  Thomas  H.  Perkins,  and  aL, 
trustees,  complainants,  against  Michael  Plays,  and  ah,  respond- 
ents, and  of  the  filing  thereon  as  on  file  in  this  oilice. 

In  witness  whereof,  1  have  hereto  set  my  hand  and  af- 
[l.  s.]         fixed  the  seal  of  said  court,  this  twenty-eighth  day  of 
September,  A.  D.,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two. 

GEORGE  C.  WILDE,  Clerk. 

SUPREME  JUDICIAL  COURT. 

Suffolk,  ss.     In  Equity. 

Thomas  H.  Perkins,  et  al. 

v. 
Michael  Hays,  et  als. 

The  answer  of  Michael  Hays,  one  of  the  defendants  to  the 


185 

bill  of  complaint  of  Thomas  H.  Perkins  and  William  H.  Gardi- 
ner, surviving  executors  and  trustees  under  the  will  of  James 
Perkins,  deceased,  complainants. 

And  this  defendant  in  further  answering  admits,  that  said  George 
W.  Doane  has  since  his  intermarriage  with  said  Eliza,  become 
embarrassed  in  his  circumstances  and  has  failed,  and  this  defend- 
ant alleges,  that  at  the  time  of  said  failure  said  George  VV.  Doane 
was  and  still  is  largely  indebted  to  this  defendant  for  moneys  ad- 
vanced or  liabilities  assumed  for  said  Doane  bv  this  defendant; 
that  in  consequence  of  said  indebtedness,  and  to  arrange  and  set- 
tle the  same  to  the  best  advantage,  the  said  Eliza  did,  with  the 
consent,  in  writing,  of  her  husband,  the  said  George  VV.  Doane, 
make  and  execute  an  agreement  with  this  defendant,  at  the  time 
and  to  the  effect  set  forth  in  said  bill  of  complaint,  and  subse- 
quently and  in  pursuance  of  said  agreement  the  said  Eliza  did, 
with  like  consent,  in  writing,  make  and  execute  to  this  defend- 
ant a  certain  instrument  or  power  of  attorney,  of  the  date,  tenor 
and  effect  as  set  forth  in  said  bill,  but  for  greater  certainty  this 
defendant  begs  leave  to  refer  to  the  original  agreement  and  power 
of  attorney  executed  by  said  Eliza,  now  in  this  defendant's  pos- 
session, ready  to  be  produced  as  this  Honorable  Court  shall 
direct. 

And  this  defendant  in  further  answering  admits,  that  in  accord- 
ance with  said  power  of  attorney,  and  under  the  authority  there- 
by vested  in  him,  he  did,  at  some  time  before  the  first  of  October 
last,  make  known  to  said  trustees  that  he  was  entitled  to  receive 
from  the  annuity  of  said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  upon  the  tenth  of  Jan- 
uary, eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-one,  the  sum  of  one  thousand 
dollars,  with  interest  thereon  from  the  thirteenth  dav  of  October, 
eighteen  hundred  and  forty-nine,  that  said  sum,  or  any  part  there- 
of, had  not  been  paid,  and  did  demand  of  said  trustees,  complain- 
ants, said  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  with  the  interest  thereon, 
to  be  paid  to  him  from  the  quarterly  payment  of  said  annuity 
then  next  accruing,  with  which  reasonable  request  the  said  com- 
plainants refused  and  still  refuse  to  comply. 

And  this  defendant  further  says,  he  has  never  heard  or  been  in- 
formed, save  by  the  said  complainant's  bill,  that  one  Edward  N. 
Perkins  claims  to  receive  of  the  trustees  aforesaid  the  quarterly 
payment  of  said  annuity  due  upon  the  first  day  of  October  last 
to  said  Eliza,  under  said  will,  and  makes  such  claim  under  and 
by  virtue  of  a  certain  writing  in  said  bill  of  complaint  set  forth, 
which  writing  the  said  Edward  N.  Perkins  alleges  to  have  been 
given  to  him  by  said  Eliza  G.  Doane  for  a  full  consideration,  but 
this  defendant  does  not  admit  that  said  order  was  given  by  said 
Eliza  G.  Doane  or  received  by  said  Perkins,  if  the  same  was  ever 
given,  until  some  time  after  the  date  thereof,  and  this  defendant 


18€ 

alleges  that  said  order  was  given  by  said  Eliza  to  said  George 
W.  Doane,  and  by  him  endorsed  and  given  to  said  Perkins,  the 
said  George  W.  Doane  knowing  well  at  the  time  of  the  existence 
of  said  articles  of  agreement  and  power  of  attorney,  and  that 
die  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  with  interest,  was  due  thereun- 
der to  this  defendant  and  was  unpaid,  and  that  the  same  was  a 
prior  charge  and  incumbrance  upon  said  annuity  ;  and  this  de- 
fendant further  alleges,  that  said  writing  given  to  said  Edward  N. 
Perkins,  (if.  any  such  was  given,  which  this  defendant  does  not 
admit,)  and  under  which  he  claims  the  quarterly  payment  due  to 
said  Eliza  the  first  day  of  October  last,  was  given  to  said  Per- 
kins more  than  two  years  subsequent  to  the  articles  of  agreement 
and  power  of  attorney  given  to  this  defendant  by  said  Eliza  G. 
Doane,  and  that  he  believes  said  writing  was  received  bv  said 
Perkins  with  full  knowledge  on  his  part  of  the  existence  of  said 
power  of  attorney,  that  if  any  consideration  was  paid  therefor, 
it  was  paid  with  the  knowledge,  on  the  part  of  said  Perkins,  of 
the  existence  of  said  power,  that  said  writing  was  made  by  said 
Eliza,  endorsed  by  said  George  W.  Doane,  and  received  by  said 
Perkins  for  the  purpose,  and  none  other,  of  interfering  with  and 
delaying  this  defendant  in  receiving  the  amount  to  which  he  was 
entitled  under  said  power,  and  that  said  writing  was  never  pre- 
sented by  said  Perkins  to  said  trustees  and  payment  thereof  de- 
manded, until  long  after  said  trustees  were  notified  by  this  de- 
fendant of  the  existence  of  said  articles  of  agreement  and  power 
of  attorney,  and  payment  of  the  amount  due  thereunder  demand- 
ed of  them  by  this  defendant. 

And  this  defendant  further  says,  that  all  of  the  surviving  issue 
of  James  Perkins,  deceased,  living  at  the  time  of  the  execution 
and  delivery  of  said  articles  of  agreement  and  power  of  attor- 
ney, had  attained  the  age  of  twenty-one  years  prior  to  such  exe- 
cution and  delivery. 

And  this  defendant  in  further  answering  says,  that  the  said  ar- 
ticles of  agreement  and  power  of  attorney  were,  to  the  best  of 
his  recollection  and  belief,  respectively  executed  and  delivered  at 
the  respective  dates  thereof;  that  prior  to  the  delivery  of  said  in- 
struments this  defendant  had  become  liable  for  certain  notes  drawn 
by  said  George  W.  Doane  and  endorsed  by  this  defendant,  a 
schedule  of  which  notes,  to  the  best  of  this  defendant's  recollec- 
tion and  belief,  is  hereto  appended,  marked  A  ;  that,  by  reason  of 
the  non-payment  of  said  notes  by  said  Doane,  and  the  liability  of 
this  defendant  as  endorser  upon  the  same,  suits  were  commenced 
against  this  defendant  to  recover  the  amount  of  said  notes,  a 
schedule  of  which  suits,  to  the  best  of  this  defendant's  recollec- 
tion and  belief,  is  hereto  appended,  marked  B;  that  this  defend- 
ant was  threatened  with  suits  upon  the  remainder  of  said  notes; 


187 

that  this  defendant  does  not  know  what  suits  had  been  commenced 
or  were  then  pending  against  George  VV.  Doane  upon  said  notes, 
or  upon  any  of  them;  that  there  was  no  contract,  agreement  or 
understanding  either  at  or  before  or  after  the  date  of  said  agreement, 
between  this  defendant  and  George  W.  Doane,  that  this  defend- 
ant should  loan  or  advance  money  to  said  Doane,  or  to  or  for  his 
use  in  settling  and  compromising  said  notes,  or  any  of  them,  ex- 
cept as  follows:  Prior  to  the  execution  of  said  agreement  by 
Eliza  G.  Doane,  the  said  George  W.  Doane  entered  into  a  ver- 
bal agreement  with  this  defendant,  that  if  this  defendant  would 
settle  and  take  up  the  notes  of  said  Doane  upon  which  this  de- 
fendant was  endorser,  he,  the  said  Doane,  would  give  to  this  de- 
fendant as  security  for  the  payment  of  the  sum  so  expended,  or 
some  portion  thereof,  a  writing  signed  or  to  be  signed  by  Sarah 
P.  Cleveland,  securing  the  payment  of  the  same  upon  her  indi- 
vidual estate,  which  security  would  have  been  satisfactory  to  this 
defendant,  but  when  the  papers  in  pursuance  of  said  agreement 
were  about  to  be  drawn  and  executed,  the  said  Doane  declined 
and  failed  to  give  the  promised  security,  but  substituted  the  agree- 
ment with  Eliza  G.  Doane,  as  aforesaid  ;  that  the  sum  of  twenty 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  eighteen  dollars  in  said  agreement 
mentioned,  was  paid  by  ibis  defendant  in  the  settlement  of  the 
notes  of  said  Doane,  endorsed  by  this  defendant,  and  to  the  per- 
sons by  whom  said  notes  were  held,  or  their  attornies  or  agents 
as  set  forth  in  the  schedule  hereunto  annexed,  marked  C ;  thai 
the  sums  so  paid  were  not  paid  in  pursuance  and  execution  of  any 
agreement,  contract  or  understanding  between  George  W.  Doane 
and  this  defendant,  but  were  paid  in  pursuance  of  the  agreement 
of  Eliza  G.  Doane  with  this  defendant,  and  in  the  confidence  that 
said  agreement  would  be  adhered  to,  and  the  promise  therein 
contained  carried  out  in  good  faith. 

And  this  defendant  in  further  answering,  denies  that  there  was 
at  the  date  of  said  articles  of  agreement  or  before  or  subsequent 
thereto,  prior  to  the  payment  of  any  moneys  by  the  defendant,  to 
or  for  the  use  of  said  Doane,  or  in  the  settlement  of  said  suits,  any 
agreement,  contract  or  understanding  between  ibe  said  George 
VV.  Doane  and  this  defendant,  that  this  defendant  should  directly 
or  indirectly  take  or  receive  for  the  loan  of  any  money,  then,  be- 
fore or  thereafter  to  be  lent  to  said  Doane  by  this  defendant,  or 
advanced  or  paid  by  this  defendant  to  or  for  his  use,  in  settlement 
of  said  suits  or  otherwise,  more  than  six  per  cent,  per  annum  ;  and 
he  further  denies  that  he  has,  directly  or  indirectly,  taken,  re- 
ceived or  been  allowed  by  said  Doane,  or  charged  to  said  Doane, 
more  than  six  per  cent,  per  annum,  as  and  for  interest  for  the 
money  then,  before  or  thereafter  loaned,  advanced  or  paid  by  this 


188 

defendant  to  said  Doane,  or  to  or  for  his  use  in  settlement  of  said 
suits,  or  otherwise. 

And  this  defendant  in  further  answering,  denies  that  said  articles 
of  agreement  and  power  of  attorney  were  intended  or  given  to 
secure  the  payment  of  any  usurious  interest  or  of  any  sum  upon 
which  usurious  interest  had  been  received  by  this  defendant,  or 
the  payment  of  any  rate  of  interest  other  than  the  rate  of  six  per 
cent,  per  annum,  in  said  power  of  attorney  mentioned  ;  he  also  de- 
nies that  any  part  of  said  sum  of  twenty  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  eighteen  dollars,  in  said  power  of  attorney  mentioned,  was 
made  up  of  or  includes  any  charges  of  interest  upon  money  paid, 
loaned  or  advanced  as  aforesaid  by  this  defendant  to  said  Doane, 
or  for  his  use  at  a  greater  rate  than  six  per  cent,  per  annum. 

And  this  defendant  further  says,  that  he  does  not  know,  but  de- 
nies that  the  original  consideration  of  the  said  notes  or  other  obli- 
gations of  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  whereupon  this  defendant 
became  liable  as  endorser,  or  otherwise,  was  a  loan  or  loans  ot 
money  to  said  Doane,  or  for  his  use,  upon  which  a  greater  rate  of 
interest  than  six  per  cent,  was  reserved  or  promised,  or  agreed 
for  between  the  said  Doane  and  the  said  lender  or  lenders;  but 
this  defendant  has  been  informed,  and  believes  that  a  considerable 
portion  of  said  notes  was  discounted  at  the  banks  of  Camden,  Bur- 
lington, Mount  Hollv  and  Medford,  in  the  state  of  New  Jersey, 
and  Bristol,  in  the  state  of  Pennsylvania;  that  all  of  said  notes 
were,  to  the  best  of  this  defendant's  recollection  and  belief,  en- 
dorsed in  blank  by  this  defendant;  that  a  portion  of  said  endorse- 
ments was  obtained  by  said  George  \V.  Doane  of  this  defendant, 
under  the  representation  and  promise  of  said  Doane,  that  they 
were  required  for  and  should  be  applied  to  the  renewal  of  other 
notes  of  said  Doane,  endorsed  by  this  defendant,  which  were  about 
falling  due;  that  the  notes  obtained  by  such  representations  were 
not  applied  to  the  purpose  for  which  they  were  obtained  by  said 
Doane,  but  were  used  by  said  Doane,  and  the  proceeds  wrong- 
fully applied  by  him  to  other  purposes. 

And  this  defendant  insists  that  he  is,  under  the  said  articles  of 
agreement  and  power  of  attorney,  entitled  to  receive  from  the 
complainants,  trustees  as  aforesaid,  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dol- 
lars, with  interest  thereon  from  the  thirteenth  day  of  October, 
eighteen  hundred  and  fortv-nine,  and  the  like  sum  of  one  thousand 
dollars,  with  interest,  in  each  and  every  year,  until  the  amount 
which  he  is  entitled  to  receive  under  said  power  of  attorney,  shall 
be  fully  paid  ;  and  that  the  same  should  have  been  paid  to  this  de- 
fendant by  said  trustees  when  demanded  of  them,  or  as  soon 
thereafter  as  the  same  had  accrued  and  become  payable  to  said 
Eliza  G.  Doane,  under  said  will ;  and  this  defendant  insists  that  the 
said  pretended  order  to  said  Edward  N.  Perkins,  is  of  no  force  or 


189 

validity,  or  constitutes  any  claim  upon  said  annuity  as  against  the 
agreement  and  power  of  attorney  given  to  this  defendant. 

MICHAEL  HAYS. 
S.  G.  Wheeler,  Jr.,  Solicito?*  of  Counsel. 

Suffolk,  ss.  Boston,  July  28,  1S52. 

Personally  appeared  the  above  named  Michael  Hays,  and  made 
oath  that  the  matters  contained  in  the  foregoing  answer  are  true, 
so  far  as  thev  are  stated  as  of  his  own  knowledge,  and  so  far  as 
they  are  stated  from  information  and  belief,  he  believes  them  to 
be  true.  Before  me, 

GEORGE  P.  SANGER. 

Justice  of  the  Peace. 

A. 

Schedule  of  notes  drawn  by  George  W.  Doane  and  endorsed 
bv  Michael  Hays,  referred  to  in  preceding  answer  of  M.  Hays: 
Note  dated  June  2,184S,G.  W.Doane,end'sed  by  M.Hays,   $1,000 


it 

July 

19, 

a 

n 

ii 

Aug 

•  8, 

a 

H 

ii 

K 

10, 

a 

it 

a 

n 

14, 

a 

it 

a 

a 

28, 

a 

ii 

tt 

Sep. 

10, 

a 

it 

a 

(« 

20, 

a 

ii 

a 

a 

23, 

a 

a 

a 

Nov 

.16, 

a 

a 

■a 

<< 

29, 

a 

a 

■a 

a 

30, 

a 

tt 

■a 

a 

30, 

a 

it 

■a 

Dec.  16, 

a 

a 

tt 

«< 

19, 

a 

a 

a 

a 

21, 

a 

a 

a 

a 

21, 

a 

a 

a 

a 

7, 

a 

M 

n 

it 

26, 

a 

ti 

it 

a 

27, 

a 

ii 

■it 

Jan. 

14, 

a 

ii 

it 

1,000 

it 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

it 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

it 

1,000 

it 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

it 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

ii 

1,000 

821,000 

B. 

The  defendant,  Michael  Hays,  is  unable  to  furnish  a  schedule 
of  the  suits  commenced  against  said  Hays,  on  account  of  notes  of 
G.  VV.  Doane  endorsed  by  said  Hays. 


190 

C. 

Schedule  of  amount  of  moneys  paid  by  Michael  Hays,  on  ac- 
count of  endorsements  on  notes  of  George  W.  Doane,  and  of  the 
names  of  persons  to  whom  paid,  being  schedule  C,  referred  to  in 
preceding  answer  of  M.  Hays. 

IS49,  August.    Paid  to  Charles  M.  Harker,  for  my  en- 
dorsements of  Doane's  notes.  $5,104.49 
"         Paid  to  Charles   Mickle,           for  do.  700.00 
"           "               "      Benjamin  B.  Earle,           "  750.00 
"               "       Uriah  Brock,                     "  666.0(1 
"      Hopkins  &  Sons,               "  341.65 
Camden  Bank,                   "  2,000.00 
"       Captain  Kester,                 «  400.00 
"      Franklin  Wooloian,         "  2,250.00 
Dr.  Gideon  Humphrey,    "  2,000.00 
"      John  Black,                       "  1,000.00 
Mount  Holly  Bank,          "  1,000.00 
•<       Medford  Bank,                  "  2,000.00 
"       Bristol  Bank,                      "  2,000.00 
"           "               M      Costs  on  suits  brought  on  notes 
of  G.  W.  Doane  to  the  following  Attor- 
neys :  James  W.  Wall,  Peter  D.  Vroom, 
Henry  Mcllvaine,  and  Garrett  S.  Can- 
non, '  200.00 
"           "    Interest  on  above  to  January  10,  1850,  406.00 


$20,818.80 


F-iod  August  7,  1852. 


- 


Attest:  G.  C.  WILDE,  Clerk. 


COMMONWEALTH  OF  MASSACHUSETTS. 

Clerk's  Office,  ) 

Supreme  Judicial  Court.  J 
Suffolk,  ss. 

I,  George  C.  Wilde,  clerk  of  the  Supreme  Judicial  Court,  with- 
in and  for  said  county  of  Suffolk,  hereby  certify  that  the  foregoing 
is  a  true  copy  of  the  answer  of  Michael  Hays,  one  of  the  respon- 
dents in  the  suit  in  equity,  Thomas  H.  Perkins  and  at,  trustees,  v. 
Michael  Hays  and  al,  and  of  the  schedules  thereto  annexed,  and 
of  he  filing  thereon,  as  on  file  in  this  office. 

In  witness  whereof,  I  have  hereto  set  my  hand  and  af- 

[l.  s.]         fixed  the  seal  of  said  court,  this  twenty-eighth  day 

of  September,  A.  D..  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two. 

GEORGE  C.  WILDE,  Clerk. 


m 

x. 

Extract  from  the  answer  of  Edward  N.  Perkins,  one  of  the  de- 
fendants to  the  bill  of  complaint  of  Thomas  H.  Perkins  and  Wil- 
liam H.  Gardiner,  vs.  Michael  Hays  mid  al. 

And  this  defendant  being  so  advised,  further  insists  that  even  if 
said  pretended  agreement  and  power  of  attorney  were,  in  fact, 
executed  and  delivered  by  said  Eliza,  at  the  times  and  for  the 
considerations  and  purposes  the  same  purport  to  be,  (which  this 
defendant  docs  not  admit)  yet  the  complainants  ought  not  to  re- 
cognize the  same  as  of  any  validity,  and  for  the  following  among 
other  reasons,  that  is  to  say: 

1st.  Because  the  said  Eliza,  being  a  feme  covert,  had  not  the 
legal  capacity  to  make  and  execute  such  agreement,  or  to  appoint 
an  attorney  tor  any  purpose. 

2d.  Because  that  said  annuity  was  provided  by  said  testalor 
for  the  comfortable  support  of  said  Eiiza,  during  her  life,  and  is 
lo  be  paid  to  her  personally,  or  upon  her  separate  order,  from 
quarter  to  quarter,  for  her  personal  use,  and  the  support  of  the 
children  of  the  testator  during  their  minority ;  that  said  annuity 
is  from  its  nature  and  objects  not  capable  of  or  subject  to  assign- 
ment by  anticipation,  and  to  give  effect  to  an  assignment  by  an- 
ticipation of  any  part  of  it,  would  put  it  in  the  power  of  the  said 
Eliza,  either  voluntarily  or  under  the  influence  of  others,  to  assign 
away  the  whole  of  it  for  her  life  at  one  time,  and  thus  at  once 
and  forever  divest  herself 'and  the  minor  children  of  the  testator 
of  the  means  of  support  provided  for  her  and  them  by  the  will  by 
said  annuity,  and  to  divert  said  annuity  from  the  purpose  for  which 
it  was  given,  which  would  be  inconsistent  with  the  limited  title 
vested  in  her,  and  exceed  the  power  given  her  by  the  will. 

3d.  Because  that  said  alleged  power  of  attorney,  even  if  the 
same  amounts  to  an  assignment,  (which  the  defendant  does  not 
admit)  does  not  purport  to  transfer  or  authorize  said  Hays  to  re- 
ceive from  the  complainants  the  whole  of  any  one  quarterly  pay- 
ment of  said  annuity,  but  only  of  a  portion  thereof;  and  such  as- 
signment, not  assented  to  by  the  complainants,  is  invalid  and  in- 
effectual to  pass  to  said  Hays  any  rights  or  interest  to  or  in  said 
annuity,  or  any  quarterly  payment  thereof  and  the  complainants 
cannot  be  compelled  by  said  Hays  to  pay  him  anylhing  bv  virtue 
thereof;  and  this  defendant  further  insists,  being  so  advised,  that 
said  complainants,  even  if  they  otherwise  had  a  diseretionarv 
power  to  pay  said  Hays  any  portion  of  said  annuity,  ought  not  in 
equity  to  have  paid  him  any  portion  of  said  sum  of  fifteen  hundred 
dollars,  the  quarterly  payment  of  said  annuity,  which  became 
payable  to  said  Eliza  on  the  first  day  of  October  last,  by  reason 
of  the  Itettcr  title  of  this  defendant  thereto  as  hereinafter  answered, 
averred  and  insisted  on. 


192 

And  this  defendant  further  answering,  admits  that  he  made  a 
claim  and  demand  on  the  complainants  to  pay  him  said  fifteen 
hundred  dollars,  which  became  payable  on  account  of  said  an- 
nuity on  the  first  day  of  October  last,  as  alleged  in  the  bill,  by 
virtue  of  the  order  from  said  Eliza  in  the  bill  set  out;  and  this  de- 
fendant avers  that  said  order  was  delivered  to  this  defendant  for 
a  full  consideration,  to  wit:  the  sum  of  fifteen  hundred  dollars  by 
him  paid  and  advanced  to  the  personal  use  of  said  Eliza,  upon  the 
faith  of  said  order,  and  relying  upon  the  receipt  of  said  sum  from 
the  complainants  upon  said  order  for  repayment. 

And  this  defendant  insisting  that  his  right  to  receive  said  quar- 
terly payment  of  said  annuity  is  superior  to  said  alleged  right  of 
said  Hays,  and  that  the  complainants  ought  to  have  paid  the  same 
to  this  defendant  on  the  presentation  of  said  order,  and  wholly  de- 
nving  the  validity  of  said  Hays'  alleged  claim  to  any  portion 
1  hereof,  prays  this  honorable  court  to  order  and  decree  in  this 
suit  that  the  complainants  shall  pay  over  the  said  sum  to  this  de- 
fendant, together  with  interest  thereon,  since  the  first  dav  of  Oc- 
tober  last,  if  any  has  been  made  or  received  by  said  complain- 
ants. 

EDWARD  N.  PERKINS. 

J.  L.  English,  Solicitor  and  CounsaL 

MASSACHUSETTS. 

Suffolk,  .<?.<?.  May  27,  A.  D.  1852. 

Personally  appeared  the  above  named  Edward  N.  Perkins  and 
made  oath  that  the  matters  contained  in  the  foregoing  answer 
which  are  stated  of  his  own  knowledge  are  true,  and  that  those 
matters  which  are  bv  him  stated  as  from  information  and  belief, 
he  believes  the  same  to  be  true. 

Before  me,  EDWARD  DEXTER, 

Justice  of  the  Peace, 
Filed  May  28,  1852. 

Jlttest :  GEO.  C.  WILDE,  Clerk. 

Copv  of  answer  and  filing  thereon. 

Attest :  GEO.  C.  WILDE,  Clerk. 


AA  1. 

Burlington,  January,  1850. 
Bishop  Doane,  Riverside. 

Sir:  I  think  it  a  very  singular  thing  that  every  other  person 
can  have  some  satisfaction  concerning  their  money  but  us;  you 
told  both  William  and  I  that  if  you  broke,  you  would  take  care  of 


193 

us,  and  since  that,  that  you  had  a  right  to  select  creditors,  and 
that  I  should  be  one  of  them,  and  in  both  of  these  you  ham  not 
kept  your  word  ;  and  since  that  you  have  treated  us  with  nothing 
but  contempt,  when  we  have  spoken  to  you  concerning  our  money 
or  our  wants  The  last  time  that  I  spoke  to  you  was  on  the  19th 
of  November,  when  you  almost  stamped  your  foot  and  said,  ha ! 
what  is  the  use  of  coming  here  after  money,  I  am  under  no  obli- 
gations, and  then  refined  it  down  to — no  special  obligations — and 
said  that  you  had  given  Up  all  that  you  had  to  the  creditors;  now 
I  think  that  you  have  not  given  up  anything,  for  that  I  have  your 
own  words,  that  you  were  now  better  off  than  ever  you  were,  for 
you  had  your  feet  to  the  bottom  ;  now  I  wish  to  get  my  feet  to  the 
bottom,  and  know  what  ground  to  stand  on,  for  I  think  we  have 
no  right  to  be  classed  as  your  creditors,  for  we  have  been  your 
servants,  and  the  Scriptures  positively  declare  that  you  have  no 
right  to  keep  back  our  wages.  Now,  Bishop,  I  am  determined 
not  to  be  handed  about  from  you  to  the  trustees,  and  from  the 
trustees  to  you,  and  each  declaring  in  their  turn  that  they  have 
nothing  to  do  with  it,  that  you  are  the  man  to  go  to,  and  to  you 
I  mean  to  stick  to  till  we  get  our  own,  and  never  give  it  up  but 
with  my  existence.  It  is  you,  sir,  that  has  got  our  money  and  our 
services.  I  don't  think  we  have  any  right  to  give  up  our  little 
savings  for  the  last  twenty  years  to  support  and  educate  rich 
men's  children  ;  I  don't  say  gentlemen's  children,  for  I  do  not  think 
that  gentlemen  would  be  willing  that  their  children  should  eat  up 
the  little  that  the  poor  had  provided  for  their  own  children,  for 
poor  people  wish  to  have  their  children  educated  as  well  as  the 
rich ;  we  have  provided  all  things  honest  in  the  sight  of  God,  as 
then  we  might  be  able  to  educate  our  children;  now  you  being 
the  head  of  the  church,  and  have  got  all  that  we  had  from  us,  and 
then  refuse  to  educate  one  of  our  children;  now  the  Scriptures 
says  that  you  are  to  get  all  things  honest  in  the  sight  of  all  men, 
that  the  church  may  be  blameless;  now  as  you  say  that  you  have 
to  look  through  God  to  the  church  for  the  direction  in  all  assis- 
lance  necessary  for  the  church,  now  as  we  have  nothing  to  do 
with  the  church  or  the  schools,  and  would  not  be  allowed  to  have, 
we  think  we  have  no  right  to  give  up  our  money  for  that  purpose, 
and  insist  upon  not  doing  it,  as  you  say  that  you  are  under  no  ob- 
ligations to  us  for  all  the  services  that  we  have  done  to  you,  bor- 
rowed and  getting  on  credit  when  you  could  not  obtain  it  your- 
self;  you  know  that  there  was  not  a  man  to  let  you  have  one  loa.i 
of  hay,  which  T.  Milnor's  books  can  still  show,  when  William 
pledged  his  notes  to  get  provisions  for  the  schools,  and  I  paid  Mr. 
Scott  thirty  dollars,  you  sent  me  with  Mitchell  for  pigs  and  pota- 
toes, that  he  might  be  enabled  to  pay  up  his  wife's  funeral  expen- 
ses, for  when  I  saw  his  tears  I  could  not  withhold  my  hand,  and 

N 


194 

borrowed  for  myself,  which  is  yet  unpaid ;  I  think  that  you  ought 
to  look  into  these  matters,  and  see  if  you  are  under  no  obligations 
to  us.  Bishop,  you  know  that  we  was  never  under  any  obliga- 
tions to  you,  for  the  same  amount  of  work  would  have  brought 
the  same  amount  of  money  anywhere,  with  a  little  addition,  for 
when  William  lived  at  Mount  Holly  with  Mr.  Dunn,  he  had  $400  a 
year,  until  he  left  Mr.Dunn  he  had  8400,  and  I  have  been  better  paid 
myself,  for  here  I  have  had  all  things  to  provide  to  work  with. 
I  should  not  mention  these  things,  but  ingratitude  prompts  me  to 
it,  for  you  know  that  we  were  never  depending  on  you  for  any- 
thing, for  we  have  paid  out  none  of  your  money  from  the  first 
month  we  were  with  you,  and  from  year  to  year,  without  interest 
or  reward,  as  the  books  in  Burlington  bank  can  show,  and  now  I 
will  go  on  to  show  the  reward  you  have  offered  to  us,  in  refusing 
to  admit  Henrv  into  the  college.  Now  in  all  vour  sermons  and 
pamphlets  concerning  the  hall  and  college,  your  cry  to  parents  isr 
to  suffer  little  children  to  come  unto  me,  and  forbid  them  not,  for 
such  you  say  is  the  words  of  Christ  to  his  pastors,  that  they  may 
be  educated.  Now  I  will  quote  your  own  words,  as  you  say  that 
many  parents  have  set  up  late  and  rose  early  and  eat  their  scanty 
meal,  to  provide  for  their  child rens'  wants.  Sir,  when  we  had 
provided  and  you  had  got  our  all,  my  child  must  be  refused  ad- 
mittance. Now  I  do  know  that  Christ  did  not  then  intend  any 
person  to  take  any  man's  money  to  educate  other  men's  children, 
and  this  is  what  you  have  done  with  us,  and  I  feel  the  insult  worse 
than  every  thing  else,  for  in  you  we  expected  a  friend,  but  in  that 
we  have  been  grievously  disappointed  :  I  have  not  enjoyed  the 
same  peace  of  mind  since  it  happened;  I  have  always  been  wont 
to  say  that  my  peace  of  mind  flowed  like  a  river,  but  since  that  I 
have  had  some  sleepless  and  unhappy  days,  for  as  my  confidence 
in  you  vanishes,  discontent  crept  in,  and  I  have  lost  that  sweet 
feast  called  a  contented  mind ;  I  only  wish  that  you  would  settle 
with  us  and  let  us  go,  for  we  will  never  go  without  our  own,  and 
I  will  never  give  it  up  but  with  my  existence,  and  we  do  not  wish 
to  stay,  as  you  have  been  able  to  give  Deacon  a  note,  payable  in 
one  year,  and  Mr.  Hays  $1000  a  year,  and  his  daughter  educated 
at  St.  Mary's  Hall,  and  pay  the  flour  merchant  in  Philadelphia 
>>1000.  Now  I  think  we  are  as  needy  and  as  deserving  as  them, 
for  they  ought  of  their  abundance  has  gave  but  little,  but  you  have 
got  our  all.  I  hope  that  you  will  not  cast  it  aside,  but  examine 
its  contents  and  send  your  decision  immediately,  for  if  you  do  not 
you  will  only  put  m  eto  the  trouble  of  sending  another  with  usury. 
Now  let  it  not  grieve  you  to  bow  thy  ear  to  the  poor,  and  give  a 
civil  answer  with  meekness. 

MARY  CARSE. 


195 

AA.  2. 

Burlington,  March  7,  1850. 
Bishop :  I  have  been  looking  over  some  of  your  writings,  and 
I  am  astonished  with  what  eloquence,  symple*  childish  language 
you  are  endeavoring  to  blind  the  people  by  speaking  of  the  sym- 
plicity  of  children.  Now  in  your  illustration  of  tfie  nursing  of 
Moses  you  show  how  you  ought  to  be  paid,  "  nurse  this  child 
for  me  and  I  will  give  you  your  wages."  Now  when  you  so 
nicely  show  to  other  people  how  you  ought  to  be  paid,  while  you 
are  endeavoring  to  get  all  you  can  from  others,  and  paying  none. 
Bishop  you  have  gone  to  work  to  erect  schools,  and  as  you  say 
yourself  to  educate  great  men's  children,  while  we  poor  people 
are  to  pay  for  these  things,  and  you  take  good  care  to  protect 
yourself  and  family.  You  have  nourished  your  heart  as  in  the 
day  of  slaughter  upon  the  hard  earnings  of  the  poor  people  in 
general,  and  even  widows  and  orphans  are  not  exempt,  and  you 
still  say  you  have  given  up  all  to  your  creditors.  Where  is  what 
you  have  given  up  f  What  have  they  received  at  your  hand  ?  it 
is  your  consearns  overward  you  have  given  up  all  to  your  cred- 
itors. You  have  done  nothing  but  formed  a  treatvwith  the  deavil. 
1  would  like  to  know  what  any  man  has  given  up  who  is  able  to 
pay  the  washing  of  twenty-seven  shirts  in  one  week  for  himself 
and  two  sons?  Is  that  any  thing  like  giving  up?  It  is  true,  you 
made  a  treaty  with  those  who  are  able  to  bring  you  before  a 
court  of  justice  for  raising  money  on  false  pretensions.  I  have 
not  tried  that,  nor  do  I  intend.  I  have  other  matters  in  view,  for 
you  well  know  when  you  raised  that  fifty  thousand  dollars  and 
said  it  would  set  vou  on  your  feet,  you  well  knew  vou  were 
not  worth  one  half  a  farthing,  for  others  said  that  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  thousand  would  do  you  no  good,  let  alone  fifty 
thousand,  for  if  you  had  a  mint  of  money  you  and  your  sons 
would  destroy  it,  which  the  enormity  of  the  debt,  besides  your 
wife's  income  clearly  proves  without  any  investigation  into  the 
matters.  Bishop,  if  a  merchant  had  done  this  he  would  not  have 
had  leave  to  live  in  his  lordly  mansion  or  roll  in  the  same  splen- 
dor as  before,  and  if  a  man  that  calls  himself  a  minister  of  Christ 
set  such  an  example,  what  can  he  expect  others  to  do,  for  you 
are  to  let  your  light  shine  that  others  may  see  your  good  works. 
I  wonder  if  you  think  there  is  any  light  in  causing  us  to  buy  the 
products  of  the  people  on  credit  without  ever  intending  to  pay, 
and  have  them  calling  on  us  every  day  and  saying  it  was  all  our 
fault,  now7  if  you  show  me  that  this  is  setting  a  good  example  be- 
fore this  ungodly  world,  I  will  then  believe  that  you  have  done 
right,  but  if  you  do  not,  I  must  still  have  my  own  opinion  that 
you  have  never  endeavored  to  enter  in  by  the  door  of  the  sheep 


196 

fold,  but  have  been  continual  climbing  up  some  other  way  as  a 
thief  and  a  robber,  but  he  that  entereth  in  by  the  door  is  the 
shepherd  of  the  sheep,  but  you  have  been  endeavoring  to  enter  in 
by  popularity  and  a  great  name,  and  you  have  got  one,  for  when 
the  most  ungodly  has  got  one  concerning  their  misdemeanors  in 
every  way  he  says  he  has  not  done  as  bad  as  the  Bishop.  I  will 
take  you  for  judge  whether  this  is  a  great  name  or  not,  for  in  my 
humble  opinion  it  is  just  such  a  name  as  is  found  in  the  twenty- 
third  chapter  of  Matthew  and  from  the  twenty-third  to  the  thirty- 
third  verses.  Bishop,  I  think  you  must  have  forgotten  or  over- 
looked these  portions  of  scripture  with  many  others  which  I  have 
mentioned  unto  you,  or  else  you  would  never  have  been  as  you 
have,  misapplied  these  portions  of  scripture  or  else  they  do  not 
belong  to  the  present  generation.  For  all  scripture  is  given  by 
inspiration  of  God,  and  is  profitable  for  direction,  for  conviction 
and  for  reproof,  and  now  I  will  give  it  to  you  as  it  is  before  me 
lest  you  should  not  take  the  time  to  look  for  it. 

23.  Woe  unto  you,  scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypocrites !  for  ye 
pay  tithe  of  mint,  and  anise,  and  cummin,  and  have  omitted  the 
weightier  matters  of  the  law,  judgment,  mercy,  and  faith;  these 
ought  ye  to  have  done,  and  not  to  leave  the  other  undone. 

24.  Ye  blind  guides !  which  strain  at  a  gnat,  and  swallow  at  a 
came!. 

25.  Woe  unto  you,  scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypocrites!  for  ye 
make  clean  the  outside  of  the  cup  and  the  platter,  but  within  they 
are  full  of  extortion  and  excess. 

26.  Thou  blind  Pharisee!  cleanse  first  that  which  is  within  the 
cup  and  platter,  that  the  outside  of  them  may  be  clean  also. 

29.  Woe  unto  you,  scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypocrites!  because 
ye  build  the  tombs  of  the  prophets,  and  garnish  the  sepulchres  of 
the  righteous, 

30.  And  say,  if  we  had  been  in  the  days  of  our  fathers,  we 
would  not  have  been  partakers  with  them  in  the  blood  of  the 
prophets. 

31.  Wherefore  ye  be  witnesses  unto  yourselves,  that  ye  are 
the  children  of  them  which  killed  the  prophets. 

32.  Fill  ye  up  then  the  measure  of  your  fathers. 

33.  Ye  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers!  how  can  ye  escape 
the  damnation  of  hell  t 

MARY  CARSE. 


BB. 

New  Jersey,  ss. 

William  A.  J.  Munsig,  of  the  city  of  Albany,  one  of  the  late 


197 

firm  of  Munsig  and  Bowman,  of  said  city,  being  duly  sworn  ao 
cording  to  law,  doth  depose  and  say,  that  on  or  about  the  first 
day  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  forty-seven,  he,  this  deponent,  as  one  of  the  firm  of  the  said 
Munsig  and  Bowman,  entered  into  a  verbal  contract  with  George 
W.  Doane,  then  being  president  of  the  trustees  of  Burlington  Col- 
lege, to  erect  on  the  premises  belonging  to  the  said  trustees,  gas 
works,  and  a  tank  and  gasometer,  and  fixtures,  and  to  lay  down 
gas  pipes  to  convey  the  gas  underground  to  the  residence  of  the 
said  George  W.  Doane,  at  Riverside,  and  also  to  the  school  build- 
ing of  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  called  St.  Mary's  Hall,  and 
the  chapel  connected  therewith,  and  to  put  gas  fixtures  and  burn- 
ers in  said  college,  and  in  said  residence  at  Riverside,  and  in  said 
St.  Mary's  Hall  and  chapel,  and  to  furnish  pipe,  materials  and  gas 
fixtures  for  all  said  buildings ;  and  for  the  furnishing  of  which 
said  materials,  and  the  performance  of  which  said  work,  the  said 
George  W.  Doane  agreed  to  pay  the  said  Munsig  and  Bowman 
the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  in  the  month  of  November  then 
next  following,  and  to  pay  to  the  said  Munsig  and  Bowman,  at  the 
rate  of  thirty  cents  per  foot  for  the  laying  down  of  all  the  said  gas 
pipe,  inside  of  said  buildings,  and  also  agreed  to  pay  to  the  said 
Munsig  and  Bowman  the  value  of  all  the  materials  furnished  by 
them,  in  and  about  said  works;  and  also  to  pay  them,  when  their 
said  work  was  done,  a  reasonable  compensation  for  their  labor  in 
and  about  the  same,  and  to  give  them  in  payment  of  said  balance, 
approved  paper,  payable  with  interest,  within  twelve  months  after 
the  completion  of  the  said  work.  And  this  deponent  further  says 
that  in  pursuance  of  said  contract,  the  said  firm  of  Munsig  and 
Bowman  did  proceed  and  erect  a  brick  tank  and  gasometer,  and 
build  and  construct  gas  works  on  the  ground  belonging  to  the 
trustees  of  Burlington  College,  and  furnished  the  gas  pipes  and 
fixtures  for  said  college,  and  placed  them  in  said  college,  and  did 
also  furnish  the  pipes  to  conduct  the  gas  from  said  gas  works  and 
lay  the  same  through  the  street  and  into  the  residence  of  the  said 
George  VV.  Doane,  at  Riverside,  and  did  furnish  and  lay  the  gas 
pipes  and  put  them  in  the  residence  of  said  George  W.  Doane,  at 
Riverside,  and  did  also  furnish  and  put  gas  fixtures  and  burners 
into  said  residence;  and  that  the  costs  of  the  said  pipe  and  fix- 
tures and  burners,  and  laying  the  same,  and  putting  them  into 
said  residence,  and  through  the  grounds  leading  to  said  residence 
from  the  street,  was  about  five  hundred  dollars;  and  the  said 
Munsig  and  Bowman  also  furnished  and  laid  the  pipe  from  the  said 
residence  of  George  W.  Doane,  at  Riverside,  through  the  street 
and  into  and  through  the  St.  Mary's  Hall  and  chapel,  and  fur- 
nished and  laid  anoSput  in  the  gas  pipe,  fixtures  and  burners,  in 
said  St.  Mary's  Hall  and  chapel,  and  all  the  necessary  fixtures  to 


198 

burn  gas  therein.  And  this  deponent  further  says,  that  after  the 
said  Munsig  and  Bowman  had  finished  all  the  said  work,  at  an  ex- 
pense to  themselves,  over  and  above  their  own  labor,  of  more  than 
four  thousand  dollars,  this  deponent,  on  or  about  the  twenty-third 
day  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  forty-eight,  applied  to  said  George  W.  Doane  to  comply  with 
his  agreement,  and  to  give  to  the  said  Munsig  and  Bowman  ap- 
proved paper,  payable  with  interest,  within  the  period  of  one  year, 
for  the  balance  due  to  said  Munsig  and  Bowman  on  account  of 
said  work  and  materials  furnished ;  and  the  said  George  W. 
Doane  refused  to  settle  with  said  Munsig  and  Bowman,  and  to 
comply  with  his  said  agreement;  but  after  considerable  difficulty, 
the  said  George  W.  Doane  agreed  to  give  to  said  Munsig  and 
Bowman  his  six  notes,  without  an  indorser  and  without  interest, 
for  the  following  sums,  and  of  the  following  dates  respectively, 
viz: 

One  note  for  $365.00  payable  at    5  months,  dated  Dec.  8,  J  848. 


it 

347.13 

<< 

9 

a 

Feb. 

22, 1848. 

<( 

200.00 

a 

9 

a 

a 

21,  1848- 

a 

400.00 

a 

12 

a 

a 

22,  1848. 

a 

450.00 

tt 

12 

tt 

it 

22,  1848. 

a 

400.00 

a 

9 

a 

a 

25,1848. 

Which  said  notes  this  deponent  was  compelled  very  reluctant- 
ly to  receive,  the  said  firm  of  Munsig  and  Bowman  being  at  the 
time  very  much  in  want  of  money  to  carry  on  their  business.  And 
this  deponent  further  says,  that  the  said  firm  were  obliged  to  pass 
off  said  notes  in  payment  of  their  debts,  and  that  they  have  all 
since  become  due  and  payable,  and  have  been  protested  for  non- 
payment, and  that  this  deponent,  William  A.  J.  Munsig,  since  the 
dissolution  of  the  firm  of  Munsig  and  Bowman,  has  been  called 
upon  to  pay  and  take  up  said  notes.  And  this  deponent  further 
says,  that  the  said  George  W.  Doane  has  wholly  failed  to  comply 
with  his  contract,  and  to  give  approved  paper,  payable  within  one 
year  with  interest,  for  said  work ;  and  that  the  said  George  W. 
Doane,  by  reason  of  the  non-performance  of  his  said  agreement, 
has  fraudulentlv  incurred  a  debt  to  the  said  Munsig  and  Bowman 
in  the  sum  of  fourteen  hundred  and  fifteen  dollars  and  upwards. 

W.  A.  J.  MUNSIG. 
Sworn  and  subscribed  this  16th  day  of  October,  A.  D.,  1852,  be- 
fore me.  Wm.  Halsted,  Jr.,  M,  C.  C. 


cc. 


The  account  of  Garrit  S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B.  Aertson,  assignees 
of  George  W.  Doane,  of  the  city  and  county  of  B.urjjngton, 


199 

as  well  of  and  for  such  and  so  much  of  the  estate,  real  and  per- 
sonal, of  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  as  have  come  to  their 
hands,  to  be  disposed  of  conformably  to  law,  and  to  the  deed  of 
assignment,  executed  and  delivered  to  them  by  the  said  George 
W.  Doane,  as  for  their  payments  and  disbursements  out  of  the 
same. 

Dr.  These  accomptants  charge  themselves* 

1849,  March  20.  To  the  amount  of  the  in- 
ventory and  valuation  of  the  estate  of  the 
said  George  W.  Doane,  as  per  inventory 
filed,  the  real  estate  was  appraised  at  $674.00 

Household  goods,  library,  stock,  &c,  &c,      13,752.00 
Outstanding  claims,  at  2,992.50 


$17,418.50 


These    accounts    charge   themselves   with 

amount  which  actually  came  into  their 

hands,  viz: 
Real  estate  over  and  above  the  mortgages 

thereon,  $392.00 

Household  goods,  library,  stock,  &c,  sold 

at  vendue,  11,293.9*6 

Outstanding  claims,  amount  collected,  1,003.50 

Interest  On  amount  purchased  at  vendue,  by 

trustees  of  Burlington  College,  129.14 

Interest  on  amount   purchased  by  Messrs. 

Ogdon,  Garthvvaite  and  Condit,  105.97 


$12,924.57 


Per  contra  they  pray  allowance.  Cr. 

1849,  April  10.  For  cash  paid  Benj.Buckman,  Surrogate  $2.75 

John  Rodgers,  40 
William  Carse,  sundry  bills 

for  hay,  28.79 
Abraham    Gaskill,    sheriff, 
amount  of  three  execu- 
tions, in  his  hands,  1,506.30 
F.  Woolman,  clerk  at  sale,  20.00 
Jos.  L.  Wright,  auctioneer,  47.93 
A.  W.  Archer,  25 
R.  B.  Aertson,  postages,  62 
S.  C.Atkinson, advertising,  11.75 
J.  L.  &  S.  Shreve,  bill  for 

fuel,  48.52 


tt 

ti 

ti 

a 

it 

it 

a 

16, 

tt 

tt 

a 

May 

10, 

a 

a 

tt 

tt 

24, 

a 

tt 

it 

«< 

tt 

tt 

it 

a 

a 

Aug. 
Sept. 

8, 

6, 
tt 

tt 
tt 

a 

a 
a 
tt 

i( 

Hot 

1^ 

a 

it 

tl 

u 

27, 

u 

<( 

it 

it 

u 

u 

« 

tl 

Dec. 

27, 

a 

it 

200 

Sherman  and  Harron,  ad- 
vertising, 1.75 
F.  Woolman,  auctioneer,              5.00 
Sundry      creditors,     first 
dividend  of  15  per  cent, 
on  132,965.33,                    4,944.79 
]  850,  Jan.    25,    "           "       Joseph  Harding,  advertis- 
ing,                                         14.06 
"     June     5,    "           "       Clerk's  fees,  recording  as- 
signments, &c,  4.37 
"       "      "           "       Joseph  Carr,  Jun.,  for  ad- 
vertising, 1.50 
And  these  accomptants  further  pray  allowance : 

Court  and  cryer's  fees,  94 

Surrogate's  fees  for  audit- 
ing, stating,  reporting, 
proclaiming  and  filing 
this  account  copy  there- 
of, &c,  20.06 
"                      "           "      Commissions     on      $12,- 

924.57,  at  five  per  cent.,       646.22 


$7,306.00 


a 


Balance  remaining  in  ac- 
comptants hands,  to  be 
disposed  by  law,  5,618.57 

$12,924.57 


Garrit  S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B.  Aertson,  accomptants  within 
named,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  depose  and  say,  that 
the  within  account  is  in  all  things  just  and  true,  both  as  to  the 
charge  and  discharge  thereof,  according  to  the  best  of  their 
memory,  information  and  belief,  and  that  the  settlement  thereof 
hath  been  advertised  according  to  law. 

GARRIT  S.  CANNON. 
ROBERT  B.  AERTSON. 
Sworn  and  subscribed  the  21st  day  of  August,  A.  D.,  1850,  be- 
fore me, 

Benj.  Buckman,  Surrogate. 

I  have  audited  and  stated  this  account,  and  do  report  it  to  the 
Orphans'  Court  for  allowance. 

BENJ.  BCJCKMAN,  Surrogate. 

August  Term,  A.  D.  1850. 

The  surrogate  having  reported  this  account  to  the  court,  at  the 
term  of  August  last,  and  proclamation  being  then  made  for  credi- 


201 

tors  and  others  interested  in  the  estate  of  the  said  George  W. 
Doane,  to  appear  and  shew  cause,  if  any  they  have,  why  the  ac- 
count as  stated  should  not  be  allowed,  and  the  same  appearing  to 
have  been  advertised  according  to  law,  and  being  laid  over  to  the 
present  term ;  and  now  a  like  proclamation  being  made,  and  no 
exceptions  being  made  thereto,  it  is  ordered  and  decreed  that  the 
same  be  allowed  in  all  things,  as  reported  by  the  surrogate. 

JAMES  S.  HULME. 

OLIVER  H.  P.  EMLEY. 

CLAYTON  MONROE. 

THOMAS  MILNOR. 

EDWARD  TAYLOR. 
November  Term,  A.  D.  1850. 

I,  Benjamin  Buckman,  Surrogate  of  the  county  of  Burlington, 

do  certify  the  annexed  to  be  a  true  copy  of  the  ac- 

[l.  s.]     count  of  Garrit  S.  Cannon  and  Robert  B.  Aertson, 

assignees  of  George   VV.  Doane,  as  the  same  was 

passed  by  the  Orphans'  Court  of  the  county  of  Burlington,  at  the 

term  of  November,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight 

hundred  and  fifty,  and  as  the  same  remains  affiled  in  my  office, 

in  Mount  Holly,  in  and  for  said  county  of  Burlington,  in  the  state 

of  New  Jersey. 

Witness  my  hand  and  seal  of  office,  the  twenty-seventh  day  of 
September,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred 
and  fifty-two. 

BENJAMIN  BUCKMAN. 


DD. 


New  Jersey,  ss. 

Michael  Hays,  of  the  county  of  Burlington,  being  duly  sworn 
according  to  law,  doth  depose  and  say,  that  he  did,  at  the  re- 
quest of  George  W.  Doane,  Bishop  of  New  Jersey,  endorse  the 
promissory  notes  of  the  said  George  W.  Doane  to  a  large 
amount,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and 
forty-eight,  which  notes  so  endorsed  were,  as  he  supposes,  dis- 
counted at  some  Bank,  and  were  from  »  time  to  time  renewed. 
And  this  deponent  further  says,  that  the  said  George  W.  Doane, 
some  time  in  the  month  of  May,  in  the  year  of  otfr  Lord  one  thou- 
sand eight  hundred  and  forty-eight,  came  to  this  deponent  with 
notes  drawn  by  said  George  W.  Doane,  payable  to  this  deponent, 
amounting  in  the  whole  to  six  thousand  dollars,  but  without  the 
date  being  inserted  in  said  notes,  and  that  the  said  George  W. 
Doane  requested  this  deponent  to  endorse  these  notes,  being,  as 


202 

this  deponent  believes,  six  in  number  of  one  thousand  dollars  each  ; 
and  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  to  induce  this  deponent  to  endorse 
them,  told  this  deponent  that  he  was  going  away  from  home  and 
that  he  wanted  to  make  preparations  to  keep  the  thing  agoing 
until  he  came  back,  and  until  the  loan  money,  meaning  the  fifty 
thousand  dollars,  which  had  been  borrowed  on  mortgage,  should 
come  in  and  the  notes  paid ;  that  people  had  given  these  notes  for 
the  loan,  but  that  the  notes  had  not  come  due  yet.  And  this  deponent 
further  says,  that  relying  upon  the  assurances  of  the  said  George 
W.  Doane  that  these  six  notes  of  one  thousand  dollars  each  were 
to  be  used  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  other  notes  of  the  same 
amount,  which  had  been  discounted  and  which  were  coming  due 
within  a  short  time,  and  during  the  expected  absence  of  the  said 
George  W.  Doane,  he,  this  deponent,  did  reluctantly  endorse  the 
said  notes,  amounting  to  six  thousand  dollars,  although  his  liability 
for  the  said  George  W.  Doane  for  previous  endorsements  was  so 
large  that  he  was  unwilling  to  increase  it,  and  had  previously 
made  up  his  mind  not  to  endorse  any  more  notes  for  said  George 
W.  Doane  to  increase  his  responsibility.  And  this  deponent  fur- 
ther says  that  of  the  notes  endorsed  by  said  deponent  for  said 
George  W.  Doane,  four  thousand  of  them  were  protested,  and 
this  deponent  endorsed  other  notes  to  the  amount  of  four 
thousand  dollars  to  take  up  the  protested  notes ;  and  this  deponent 
further  says  that  after  he  had  endorsed  said  last  mentioned  notes, 
he  applied  to  said  George  W.  Doane  to  obtain  from  him  the  four 
protested  notes  for  the  payment  of  which  he  had  endorsed  the 
four  last  mentioned  notes,  and  the  said  George  W.  Doane  deliv- 
ered to  this  deponent  two  of  said  notes,  and  told  him  that  Mr. 
Reuben  J.  Germain  had  the  other  two  notes  :  and  this  deponent 
applied  to  the  said  Mr.  Reuben  J.  Germain  for  said  notes,  and. the 
said  Mr.  Reuben  J.  Germain  replied  that  he  knew  nothing  about 
them ;  and  this  deponent  further  says  that  he  has  been  called  upon 
to  pay  the  two  last  mentioned  notes,  for  the  payment  of  which 
the  said  George  W.  Doane  had  obtained  two  other  endorsements 
of  the  same  amount  from  this  deponent  to  take  up  said  notes,  and 
which  notes  the  said  George  W.  Doane  informed  this  deponent 
had  been  taken  up,  and  were  in  the  hands  of  said  Mr.  Reuben  J. 
Germain. 

And  this  deponent  verily  believes  that  under  pretence  of  getting 
this  deponent  to  endorse  notes  for  the  purpose  of  renewing  notes 
which  he  had  previously  endorsed,  and  which  were  coming  due, 
he  must  have  obtained  from  this  deponent  endorsements  to  the 
amount  of  ten  thousand  dollars,  which  were  not  applied  to  the 
payment  of  the  old  notes,  but  were  applied  by  said  George  W. 
Doane  to  other  objects  and  for  other  purposes  than  the  payment 
of  the  notes  they  were  intended  to  renew  and  by  means  of  which 


203 

misapplication  and  misappropriation  of  said  notes  the  liability  of 
this  deponent  for  the  said  George  W.  Doane  was,  without  this 
deponent's  knowledge  or  consent,  increased  to  an  amount  of  ten 
thousand  dollars  at  least. 

And  this  deponent  further  says,  that  the  said  George  W.-Doane 
on  or  about  the  day  of  October,  in   the  year  of 

our  Lord  one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-nine,  entered  into 
an  agreement  with  this  deponent,  that  if  he,  this  deponent,  would 
compromise  his  liability  or  his  endorsements  for  said  George 
W.  Doane,  without  a  contested  suit  at  law,  in  the  best  manner  he 
could,  that  he,  the  said  George  W.  Doane,  would  secure  to  him 
the  payment  of  the  one-half  of  such  sum  of  money  for  which  said 
compromise  was  made,  by  paying  this  deponent  the  sum  of  one 
thousand  dollars  a  year,  with  interest,  until  the  said  one-half 
should  be  paid;  and  that  the  second  instalment  under  said  agree- 
ment became  due  in  January  last,  and  that  he  called  upon  the 
said  George  W.  Doane  and  requested  him  to  pay  this  deponent 
the  said  sum  of  money,  but  the  said  George  W".  Doane  said  he 
could  not  pay  until  May,  but  that  in  May  Term  he  would  receive 
his  salary  from  the  schools,  and  then  it  should  be  paid,  and  that 
this  deponent  should  have  his  money  on  the  tenth  of  May  certain  ; 
and  this  deponent  called  on  said  George  W.  Doane  about  the 
twentieth  day  of  May  last,  and  the  said  George  W.  Doane  told 
this  deponent  he  could  not  pay  the  said  money.  Deponent  then 
said,  Bishop,  this  is  a  disappointment,  and  that  if  he  could  not  get 
his  money  he  should  first  present  him  to  the  church,  and  if  he 
could  not  get  redress  in  that  way  he  must  resort  to  the  law.  And 
the  said  George  W.  Doane  then  said,  that  if  he,  this  deponent, 
did  that,  he  would  put  himself  upon  his  defence,  and  this  deponent 
would  get  nothing.  Deponent  replied,  I  got  nothing  as  it  was,  and 
I  could  do  no  worse,  and  the  said  Georsje  W.  Doane  then  said 
that  this  must  be  the  last  intercourse  between  them  ;  and  this 
deponent  then  left  him,  and  drew  up  a  memorial  to  present  to  the 
Episcopal  convention,  and  gave  it  to  a  member  of  said  convention 
to  present ;  and  he  believes  that  the  said  memorial  would  have 
been  presented  to  said  convention  had  not  the  said  convention, 
contrary  to  all  its  previous  practice,  adjourned  the  first  day  of  its 
sessions. 


MICHAEL  HAYS. 


Sworn  and  subscribed  this  21st  day  > 
of  July,  A.  D.,  1851,  before  me,    3 

Wm.  HALSTED,  Jr.,  M.C.C, 


204 

EE   1. 

State  of  New  Jersey,  ) 

?ss. 
Burlington  County,  ) 

Elizabeth  Hays,  of  the  township  and  county  of  Burlington,  in 
the  state  of  New  Jersey,  doth  depose  and  say,  that  on  or  about 
the  first  of  September,  eighteen  hundred  and  forty-eight,  Rev. 
George  W.  Doane  came  to  the  house  of  my  husband,  Michael 
Mays,  to  procure  his  endorsements  on  notes ;  the  said  George  W. 
Doane  representing  at  the  same  time  that  my  husband  should  come 
to  no  loss  by  so  doing.  I  stated  to  the  said  George  W.  Doane 
that  I  was  not  willing  that  my  husband  should  endorse  any  more 
notes  for  him,  for  I  was  fearful  that  he  might  come  to  great  loss 
by  so  doing.  Said  George  W.  Doane  replied,  Madam,  upon  the 
honor  of  a  man  and,  the  faith  of  a  Christian,  your  husband 
shall  not  lose  one  cent  by  endorsing  for  me ;  and  made  use  of 
other  arguments  to  induce  me  to  believe  that  there  was  no  danger 
of  my  husband  coming  to  any  loss  by  endorsing  for  him  the  said 
G.  W.  Doane. 

ELIZABETH  HAYES. 
Sworn  and  subscribed  before  me,  "\ 


this  fourteenth  day  of  Novem- 


> 


ber,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty- 
three  J 

JOHN  RODGERS,  Master  in  Chancery. 

EE    2. 

Riverside,  21st  December,  1848. 
Col.  Hays, 

Mv  dear  Sir, 

It  seems  to  me  that  your  decision  this  morning 
was  not  judicious.  There  is  paper  with  your  name  maturing. 
With  your  name  it  can  be  continued.  II  not  continued  it  will  be 
troublesome.  No  increase  of  responsibility  is  asked.  No  respon- 
sibility in  blank.  It  is  just  substituting  one  note  for  another,  to 
give  us  time  to  take  them  up.  Mr.  Germain  thinks  you  felt 
doubtful  whether  the  paper  asked  for  would  be  used  in  the  way 
proposed.  But  I  cannot  believe  this.  If  such  were  your  doubts 
nothing  would  be  easier  than  to  remove  them,  by  handing  you  the 
notes  withdrawn.  I  hope  you  will  consent  to  the  arrangement. 
By  merely  keeping  the  notes  afloat  they  will  all  in  due  time  be 
paid.  There  has  been  no  new  paper  for  a  long  while. 
I  am  getting  well,  but  the  weather  keeps  me  in. 

Truly  your  friend, 

G.  W.  DOANE. 


205 

EE  3. 

St.  Mary's  Hall,  Dec.  22d,  1848. 
Col.  Hays, 

Dear  Sir, 

I  enclose  you  the  Bishop's  note.  The  case  is 
precisely  as  is  there  stated.  It  is.  very  desirable  that  the  notes 
should  be  renewed  at  this  time.  There  is  no  doubt  of  the  Bishop's 
ability  to  meet  them  in  due  time.  What  he  desires  is  time.  Such 
time  as  the  banks  are  willing  to  afford. 

If  you  consent  to  endorse  the  enclosed,  it  is  very  desirable  that 
it  be  done  in  time  to  send  down  to  Camden  by  the  eleven  o'clock 
train  this  morning. 

In  haste,  very  truly  yours,  etc., 

R.'J.  GERMAIN. 

FF   3. 

State  of  New  Jersey,  ) 

)>  ss. 
Burlington  County,  ) 

About  the  middle  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  forty-eight,  I  was  present  when  Bishop  Doane 
came  to  my  father's  house,  with  a  paper  purporting  to  be  a  state- 
ment of  notes  of  his,  (Bishop  Doane's,)  endorsed  by  my  father, 
amounting  to  eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars.  My  father 
said  to  Bishop  Doane,  "  Bishop,  I  thought  I  was  an  endorser  on 
your  paper  to  the  amount  of  twelve  or  thirteen  thousand  dollars." 
When  Bishop  replied,  "  No,  this  statement  includes  all  the  notes 
on  which  vou  are  endorser."  I  heard  mv  father  then  say  that  he 
never  would  endorse  any  more  ox  another  note  for  him,  (Bishop 
Doane.)  except  for  renewal  of  notes  on  which  he  was  already 
endorser.  Bishop  said  he  wanted  no  others.  In  Bishop  Doane's 
visits  to  my  father's,  I  have  frequently  heard  him  (Bishop  Doane) 
ask  for  liquor,  which  was  always  handed  out,  and  of  which  lie 
freely  drank. 

SARAH  ANN  II.  DEACON. 


Affirmed  and  subscribed  the  4th 
day  of  November,   1852,  be 
fore  me, 


'■\ 


JOHN  FOLWELL,  Justice  of  the  peace. 


206 

FF  2. 

State  of  Pennsylvania,  > 
Philadelphia.  ) 

William  Barclay,  being  duly  sworn  according  to  law,  doth  de- 
clare and  say  that  in  the  summer  of  the  year  1851,  he  entered 
into  the  employment  of  Mr.  George  Zantzinger,  Wine  Merchant, 
of  Philadelphia,  in  the  capacity  of  Bookkeeper,  and  that  while 
there  the  account  of  George  W.  Doane  was  written  up  in  the 
books  of  said  George  Zantzinger,  and  in  the  handwriting 
of  said  George  Zantzinger;  and  that  six  or  eight  months 
previous  to  the  death  of  said  George  Zantzinger,  who  died  in 
August,  eighteen  hundred  and  fifty-two,  Mr.  Zantzinger  reques- 
ted deponent  to  cast  the  interest  upon  the  said  account,  and  the 
deponent  did  so;  and  the  account,  with  the  interest,  at  that  time 
exceeded  twelve  hundred  dollars  ;  and  deponent  gave  said  account 
to  said  George  Zantzinger,  and  he  said  he  would  attend  to  it. 
Said  George  Zantzinger  never  intimated  that  he  had  forgiven 
Bishop  Doane  said  account,  but  the  same  stood  open  upon  the  books 
of  said  George  Zantzinger  against  said  George  W.  Doane,  and  had 
never  been  carried  to  the  account  of  profit  and  loss,  or  settled  on 
the  books. 

And  this  deponent  further  says,  that  all  the  time  that  this  depo- 
nent was  in  the  employ  of  said  George  Zantzinger,  the  liquors 
purchased  by  and  for  Bishop  Doane  were  charged  to  Mrs.  Doane, 
and  that  the  account  of  Mrs  Doane  during  that  period  amounted 
to  between  one  and  two  hundred  dollars;  and  that  the  two 
accounts  of  the  Bishop  and  Mrs.  Doane  exceeded  fourteen  hun- 
ered  dollars. 

Wm.  J.  BARCLAY. 
Sworn  and  subscribed  this  23d  Novem-  l 

ber,  A.  D.  1853,  before  me,  j 

STEPHEN  N.  SIMMONS,  Alderman. 

Note. — This  affidavit  proves  first,  that  Bishop  Doane  is  still  in- 
debted to  the  estate  of  George  Zantzinger  in  the  sum  of  $1,200 
and  upwards  ;  and  proves  the  correctness  of  an  assertion  in  page 
(3  oft  his  Vindication  as  to  the  amount  of  the  indebtedness. 

Secondly,  it  proves  what  we  asserted  in  our  reply  to  the  Protest 
and  Appeal,  page  20  that  this  debt  was  omitted  from  the  list  of 
his  creditors. 

Third,  it  proves  that  part  of  the  31st  specification  that  he  was 
in  the  habit  of  providing  and  procuring  for  his  use  larger  quantities 
of  wine  and  spirituous  liquors  than  was  fit  and  becoming  in  a 
Christian  bishop^  especially  in  his  condition  of  pecuniary  embar- 
rassment. 


207 

Fourth,  it  disproves  the  idea  attempted  to  be  proved  by  Mr. 
Aertson  in  his  testimony  before  the  committee  of  investigation, 
page  104,  where  he  says  "  Zantzinger  told  him  he  should  not  wish 
to  be  considered  a  creditor  of  Bishop  Doane,  and  that  he  held  a 
note  of  the  bishop's  that  he  should  cancel  and  send  to  him,  and 
which  he  says  he  did  do."  It  may  be  true  that  Zantzinger  sent 
Aertson  a  note  of  Bishop  Doane's  which  he  held  unpaid.  But 
Mr.  Aertson  is  very  careful  not  to  tell  what  was  the  amount  of 
this  note.  It  may  have  been  a  note  for  an  account  prior  to  the 
one  now  standing  open  on  Mr.  Zantzingers's  books  against  Bishop 
Doane,  or  it  may  have  been  for  a  small  part  of  the  account.  But 
it  is  apparent  from  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Barclay  that  Mr.  Zant- 
zinger did  not  consider  that  by  sending  the  note  to  Mr.  Aertson, 
he  cancelled  all  the  account  he  had  against  the  bishop  for  wines, 
brandies  and  other  liquors. 

GG. 

Articles  of  Agreement  had,  made,  concluded  and  agreed 
upon  this  twenty-fourth  day  of  August,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-nine,  between  Mrs.  Eliza  G. 
Doane,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington,  and  state  of  New 
Jersey,  of  the  one  part;  and  Joseph  Deacon,  of  the  township  of 
Northampton,  in  the  county  and  state  aforesaid,  of  the  other  part ; 
Witnesseth,  that  whereas  the  said  Joseph  Deacon  has  incurred 
extensive  liabilities  by  means  of  numerous  endorsements  upon 
notes  drawn  bv  mv  husband,  the  right  reverend  George  VV.  Doane, 
and  suits  at  law  have  been  already  commenced  against  the  said 
Joseph  Deacon  to  recover  of  him  the  amount  due  on  such  notes. 

Now,  therefore,  in  consideration  that  the  said  Joseph  Deacon 
shall  effect  a  settlement  with  the  note  holders  of  the  entire  amount 
due  on  the  notes  aforesaid  upon  such  terms  as  can  be  agreed  upon, 
and  in  such  manner  as  that  such  settlement  shall  operate  in  the 
discontinuance  of  the  suits  at  law  so  as  aforesaid  commenced,  or 
to  be  commenced  against  him,  I,  the  said  Eliza  G.  Doane,  do 
agree  thereupon  to  transfer  and  set  over  on  the  tenth  day  of  No- 
vember next,  and  on  the  tenth  dav  of  November  in  each  and 
every  year  thereafter,  (until  the  sum  hereinafter  specified  be  paid,) 
all  the  right,  title  and  interest  I  possess  in  one  thousand  dollars, 
together  with  the  interest  hereinafter  mentioned,  part  of  the  yearly 
income  to  which  I  am  entitled  under  and  by  virtue  of  the  provisions 
of  the  last  will  and  testament  of  my  late  husband  James  Perkins. 

The  said  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars  to  be  paid  each  and  every 
year  hereafter  as  aforesaid,  until  such  sum  has  been  paid  as  will 
amount  to  the  one-half  of  such  sum  as  the  said  Joseph  Deacon 
shall  be  required  to  pay  upon  the  terms  above  referred  to,  inclu- 
ding the  entire  costs  he  shall  be  called  upon  to  pay  in  obtaining 


208 

the  discontinuance  of  said  suits ;  and  in  addition  to  the  same  the 
interest  at  six  per  cent,  per  annum  upon  the  balance  of  such  moiety 
as  aforesaid  remaining,  each  and  evory  year  after  the  payment  of 
the  said  one  thousand  dollars. 

And  the  said  Joseph  Deacon  doth  agree  to  use  all  due  diligence 
and  make  every  reasonable  effort  in  effecting  said  compromise 
above  alluded  to.  Provided  always,  nevertheless,  that  it  is  under- 
stood by  and  between  the  parties  to  this  agreement  that  the  said 
Joseph  Deacon  is  not  obliged  thereby  to  make  settlement  of  any 
suit  or  suits  where  the  defence  he  may  have  to  make  rests  exclu- 
sively upon  legal  objections  to  the  insufficiency  of  notices  served 
upon  him  as  endorser,  or  other  defects  or  insufficiencies  in  the 
protesting  of  the  said  endorsed  notes  ;  and  the  said  Joseph  Deacon 
has  full  power  to  contest  said  suit  or  suits,  if  he  shall  deem  it 
necessary  and  proper  so  to  do. 

And  in  order  that  the  stipulations  contained  in  this  agreement 
may  be  the  better  carried  out  and  completed,  the  said  Eliza  G. 
Doane  does  agree  to  give  to  the  said  Joseph  Deacon  immediately 
upon  the  settlement  of  the  suits  aforesaid,  a  power  of  atttorney 
authorizing  him  to  receive  the  said  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars, 
yearly  and  every  year,  together  with  the  interest  aforesaid,  from 
the  executors  of  the  will  of  my  late  husband,  James  Perkins, 
which  power  of  attorney  the  said  Joseph  Deacon  is  to  present  to 
said  executors  only  in  the  event  of  G.  W.  Doane  failing  to  pay 
the  same. 

In  witness  whereof,  the  said  parties  have  hereunto  set  their 
hands  and  seals  the  day  and  vear  first  above  written. 

ELIZA  G.  DOANE. 

'JOSEPH  DEACON. 

Sealed  and  delivered  in  the  presence^ 

of,   and    the  words  "  one-half  of," 

underlined  before  signing  ;  also  the 

words  "  which  power  of  attorney 

the  said  Joseph  Deacon  is  to  pre-  y 

sent  to  said   executors  only  in  the 

event  of  G.  W.  Doane  failing  to  pay 

the  same";  also  the  words  "to  be 

commenced,"  interlined, 
G.  S.  CANNON. 

I  do  hereby  consent  that  my  wife,  Eliza  G.  Doane,  shall  sign, 
seal  and  deliver  the  foregoing  agreement. 

Dated  August  24lh,  A.  D.^1849. 

G.  W.  DOANE. 
Witness  present, 

G.  S.  CANNON. 

Received  Nov.    13th,   1849,  of  Rt.   Rev.  G.  W.  Doane,  one 


209 

thousand  dollars,  being  the  first  payment  due  as  per  above  articles 
of  agreement. 
$1,000  JOSEPH  DEACON,  Sen. 

Received,  Nov.  12th,  1850,  of  Rt.  Rev.  Geo.  W.  Doane,  one 
thousand  dollars,  being  the  second  payment  due  as  per  above 
articles  of  agreement. 

$1,000  JOSEPH  DEACON,  Sen. 

HH. 

Know  all  MEN'  by  these  presents,  that  we,  George  W.  Doane, 
and  Eliza  G.,  his  wife,  of  the  city  and  county  of  Burlington,  and 
state  of  New  Jersey,  do  hereby  make,  constitute  and  appoint 
Joseph  Deacon,  of  the  township  of  Northampton,  in  the  county 
and  state  aforesaid,  cur  true  and  lawful  attorney,  for  us  and  in 
our  names  and  behalf  to  receive,  on  the  tenth  day  of  November 
next  ensuing,  and  on  the  tenth  day  of  November  in  each  and  every 
year  thereafter,  the  sum  of  one  thousand  dollars,  from  the  execu- 
tors of  the  last  will  and  testament  of  James  Perkins,  late  of  the 
city  of  Boston,  deceased,  until  said  annual  payment  of  one  thousand 
dollars  shall  amount,  in  the  whole,  to  the  sum  of  eleven  thousand 
five  hundred  dollars;  and  also  for  us,  and  in  our  names  and  behalf, 
to  receive,  on  the  tenth  day  of  January  next  ensuing,  and  on  the 
tenth  of  January  in  each  and  every  year  thereafter,  the  interest,  at 
six  per  cent,  per  annum,  upon  said  sum  of  eleven  thousand  five 
hundred  dollars,  to  be  varied  in  amount  as  the  same  shall  be  annually 
reduced  by  the  aforesaid  payments,  until  the  whole  of  said  sum  of 
eleven  thousand  five  hundred  dollars  shall  be  paid  as  aforesaid  ;  said 
interest  to  be  received  from  the  said  executors.  And  we  do  further 
authorize  and  empower  the  said  Joseph  Deacon,  for  us  and  in  our 
names,  to  give  and  sign  receipts,  acquittances  and  discharges  for  the 
said  several  sums  of  monev  so  to  be  received  bv  him  ;  it  bein^  how- 
ever  expressly  understood  by  and  between  the  said  George  W. 
Doane  and  Eliza  G.  his  wife,  and  the  said  Joseph  Deacon,  that 
application  to  the  said  executors  for  the  payment  of  said  sums  of 
money  is  only  to  be  made  by  the  said  Joseph  Deacon,  under  this 
power  of  attorney,  in  the  event  of  the  said  George  W.  Doane 
failing  to  pay  the  same,  when  the  same  shall  become  due  as 
aforesaid. 

Witness  our  hands  and  seals,  this  third  day  of  September,  A.  D. 
one  thousand  eight  hundred  and  forty-nine.     [1819.] 

G.  W.  DOANE, 


Sealed  and  delivered  in  the  pre-  } 
sence  of  J 

Sarah  P.  Cleveland. 


ELIZA  G.  DOANE. 


210 

Received  the  first  instalment  referred  to  above,  of  Rt.  Rev. 
Geo.  VV.  Doane,  November  33,  1849 — one  thousand  dollars. 

JOSEPH  DEACON. 

II. 

Copy  of  a  letter  from  John  Black,  Esq.,  President  of  the  Bank  at 
Mount  Holly,  New  Jersey,  to  the  Rt.  Rev.  Bishop  Burgess. 

"Locust  Hall,  March  29,  1852. 
Dear  Sir, 

I  received  yours  of  the  25th  on  Saturday,  at 
Mount  Holly.  It  is  the  duty  of  the  human  family  to  do  good  and 
avoid  evil  in  all  cases.  How  far  Messrs.  Garth waite,  Ogilby  and 
Germain  practised  this  golden  rule,  1  must  leave  you  to  determine 
after  I  have  given  you  the  history  of  their  representations  to  me. 

These  gentlemen  came  to  me  in  the  bank  at  Mount  Holly,  I 
think,  in  the  spring  of  1848.  Mr.  Germain  or  Ogilby  introduced 
Mr.  Garth  waite  as  the  friend  of  Bishop  Doane.  And  they  then 
stated  that  they  were  negotiating  a  loan  of  50,000  dollars  to  re- 
lieve the  Bishop  from  his  difficulties ;  for  in  his  present  position  his 
time  was  much  occupied  in  making  arrangements  to  meet  his 
notes  when  due.  Thev  stated  that  two  or  three  gentlemen  in 
Burlington  had  valued  the  Bishop's  property  at  75,000  to  80,000 
dollars,  on  which  the  Bishop  would  give  a  mortgage,  or  had  given 
one  to  secure  the  loan  of  50,000  dollars;  that  the  security  would 
be  ample,  and  the  loan  a  safe  investment.  The  interest  to  be  paid 
half-yearly,  punctually.  The  incumbrances  on  the  property,  they 
stated,  did  not  exceed  20,000  dollars,  and  this  would  be  paid  oil' 
in  the  course  of  three  vears  bv  instalments,  and  then  there  could 
not  be  a  doubt  as  to  the  securitv  of  the  50,000  dollars  loan.  Thev 
said  that  they  had  upwards  of  45,000  dollars  subscribed  ;  that  I 
must  help  them  out  in  the  loan,  as  it  would  be  a  great  comfort  to 
the  Bishop,  and  especially  to  the  institutions;  for  then  he  would 
devote  the  whole  of  his  time  to  the  schools  and  to  the  church. 
The  loan  of  50,000  dollars  must  be  completed  in  two  or  three 
days,  as  they  had  to  leave  Burlington. 

I  stated  to  them  that  I  did  not  wish  to  meddle  in  the  loan  in  anv 
way,  as  I  could  loan  all  the  money  1  had  without  risk.  Our  board 
of  directors  meet  at  ten  o'clock.  That  time  had  arrived.  I  told 
the  gentlemen  they  must  excuse  me.  They  said  that  they  would 
waituntil^he  board  adjourned,  which  they  did. 

When  the  board  had  adjourned,  Abraham  Brown,  Esq.,  who 
was  a  lawyer  and  a  director  of  the  bank,  asked  me  if  1  had  sub- 
scribed to  the  Bishop's  loan  of  50,000  dollars.  I  told  him  I  had 
not  and  did  not  intend  to.    He  wanted  to  know  whv,  for  he  had 


211 

subscribed  1,000  dollars,  payable  I  think  in  October,  and  he  wan- 
ted to  know  how  it  was  possible  to  resist  such  plausible  gentlemen. 
I  replied  to  him  that  I  did  not  believe  those  gentlemen  told  the 
truth  ;  that  there  was  something  about  this  loan  that  neither  he  nor 
I  understood.  He  replied  that  it  was  impossible;  those  gentlemen 
would  not  lie;  that  I  was  too  supicious  for  anything,  and  that  1 
must  take  1,000  dollars  of  the  loan  on  the  same  terms  that  he  had  ; 
that  he  would  examine  the  title  papers  and  records;  and  if  he 
found  anything  wrong  he  would  not  pay  the  money  at  the  time 
stipulated.  1  then  said,  that  to  help  them  out  I  would  subscribe 
500  dollars,  and  that  he  must  see  that  the  securities  were  all  right, 
which  he  said  he  would  certainly  do  for  his  own  interest  as  well 
as  mine.  Under  these  assurances  1  went  down  stairs  to  the  gen- 
tlemen and  subscribed  500  dollars,  payable  in  October. 

In  the  summer  of  1S48,  Abraham  Brown  died,  and  left  his  two 
sons,  Bowes  R.  Brown  and  Jonh  W.  Brown,  executors  to  his  will. 
B.  R.  Brown  was  a  lawyer,  but  had  quit  the  profession  and  retired 
to  his  farm,  near  Recklesstown,  in  the  county  of  Burlington.  After 
the  death  of  Abraham  Brown,  John  Dobbins,  Jun.,  one  of  the 
subscribers  to  the  loan,  and  myself  had  an  interview  with  Bowes 
R.  Brown  on  the  subject  of  the  Bishop's  loan.  B.  R.  Brown  then 
undertook  to  do  what  his  father  had  promised  me  he  would  do. 

A  short  time  after  this,  Bishop  Doane  came  to  the  bank  on  the 
subject  of  our  subscriptions  to  the  50,000  dollars  loan.  B.  R.  Brown 
and  John  Dobbins,  Jun.,  were  there.  I  invited  the  gentlemen  to 
go  up  stairs  in  the  directors'  room.  The  Bishop  then  stated  to  us 
that  many  had  paid  their  subscriptions,  and  that  it  would  be  a 
great  accommodation  to  him  if  we  would  anticipate  the  payment 
of k our  subscriptions,  or  give  our  notes.  Mr.  B.  R.  Brown  obser- 
ved to  the  Bishop  that  he  knew  nothing  about  the  loan  until  the 
death  of  his  father ;  as  he  had  promised  to  do  what  his  father 
would  have  done  if  alive,  he  felt  bound  to  investigate  the  titles 
and  sec  if  the  incumbrances  and  mort^njre  were  all  in  accordance 
with  the  representations.  The  Bishop  replied  to  Mr.  B.  R.  Brown 
with  some  warmth,  and  said  that  these  papers  were  drawn  up  by 
gentlemen  who  were  competent,  and  who  knew  how  such  business 
should  be  done,  and  not  by  some  old  woman  in  petticoats.  Mr. 
B.  R.  Brown  replied  with  some  earnestness  that  he  did  not  suppose 
for  one  moment  that  any  old  woman  had  a  hand  in  the  matter. 
For  his  part,  he  would  not  take  the  word  of  any  man  when  he 
was  directly  interested,  and  he  must  and  would  see  for  himself 
before  he  paid  his  own  money,  or  advised  us  to  pay  ours.  Here 
the  interview  ended,  and  the  Bishop  left  us,  to  the  best  of  my 
recollection. 

Some  strange  delusion  took  possession  of  B.  R.  Brown's  mind 
after  the  interview  with  the  Bishop,  for  he  came  to  Mr.  John  Dob- 


212 

bins  and  myself  and  stated  that  he  had  examined  the  papers  and 
records,  and  found  all  things  straight  and  in  accordance  with  the 
representations;  that  he  should  pay  the  money  when  it  should 
fall  due,  and  that,  we  must  do  the  same,  which  was  done  by  all 
of  us. 

After  the  Bishop  failed  and  had  made  an  assignment,  Mr.  John 
W.  Brown,  the  surviving  executor  of  Abraham  Brown,  (B.  R. 
Brown  having  died)  made  a  search  in  the  Clerk's  office,  and  found 
that  the  property  of  the  Bishop  which  had  been  pledged  for  the 
50,000  dollars  loan  was  mortgaged  previously  to  a  large  amount; 
the  exact  sum  I  do  not  recollect,  but  think  nearly  60,000  dollars. 

When  I  found  our  money  was  lost,  I  made  strict  inquiry  of  the 
clerk  and  his  assistant  how  it  was  possible  Mr.  B.  R.  Brown 
should  have  fallen  into  such  a  fatal  error.  To  my  astonishment, 
both  said  he  had  not  been  there  to  make  any  search,  and  there 
never  was  any  examination  made  until  the  one  by  Mr.  John  W. 
Brown. 

This,  in  substance,  is  a  true  history  of  the  whole  transaction,  to 
the  best  of  my  recollection. 

Most  respectfully  yours,  etc., 

JOHN  BLACK. 
Rt.  Rev.  George  Burgess. 

KK. 

Extract  from  the  terms  of  tuition  of  St.  Mary's  Hall,  Green 
Bank,  Burlington,  New  Jersey.  The  Bishop  of  the  Diocese, 
Patron  and  Principal :  the  Rev.  Beuben  J.  Germain,  Chaplain, 
principal  Teacher,  and  head  of  the  family. 

"  There  will  be  a  charge  of  six  dollars  for  each  term  for  the 
use  of  bed,  bedstead,  bedding  and  towels." 


INTOXICATION. 

The  following  is  the  statement  made  by  the  Rev.  Christian 
Page,  of  Bristol,  Pennsylvania: 

"  In  November,  1851,  he  (Mr.  Page)  was  sitting  in  the  saloon 
of  the  steamboat  Trenton;  just  before  she  started  on  her  evening 
trip  up  the  river,  a  respectable  looking  man  entered  the  saloon, 
and  such  was  the  peculiarity  of  his  gait  as  to  arrest  his  (Mr. 
Page's)  attention.  He  observed  him  take  a  chair  and  in  a  few 
minutes  fall  asleep,  in  a  position  in  which  he  had  never  seen  a 
sober  man  on  a  chair.  His  head  was  down,  his  arms  over  the 
back  of  the  chair  and  his  feet  extended.  So  well  convinced  was 
lie  that  he  was  intoxicated,  that  he  observed  to  a  gentleman  who 
sat  by,  "  What  a  pity  that  so  old  and  respectable  looking  a  man 


213 

should  be  seen  in  such  a  condition  !"  The  gentleman  remarked, 
"  Do  you  not  know  who  that  is  1"  He  replied,  "  No  ;  he  is  a 
stranger  to  me."  •'  That"  says  he,  "is  Bishop  Doane."  "  Well," 
he  (Mr.  Page)  replied,  "  Bishop  or  no  Bishop,  he  is  certainly  in- 
toxicated." On  reaching  Burlington,  he  (Mr.  Page)  noticed  that 
the  same  man  rose  and  appeared  to  have  difficulty  in  getting  along 
out.  A  few  days  afterwards  he  (Mr.  Page)  saw  this  man  on  the 
boat  again,  and  he  was  pointed  out  to  him  as  Bishop  Doane." 

This  is  substantially  the  same  statement  which  was  made  by 
the  Rev.  Christian  Page  to  the  Right  Rev.  William  Meade,  Bishop 
of  Virginia,  in  the  presence  of  William  Halsted,  Esq.,  and 
which  formed  a  part  of  the  thirty-first  specification  of  the  pre- 
sentment. 

Mr.  James  Buckalew,  of  Middlesex,  New  Jersey,  stated  in  the 
presence  of  Col.  J.  N.  Bird  and  Sam,  S.  Stryker,  in  the  city  of 
Trenton,  that  he  saw  Bishop  Doane  intoxicated  in  the  railroad 
cars,  going  from  New  York  to  New  Brunswick. 

Mr.  Frederick  R.  Shillow  stated  in  the  presence  of  James  S. 
Green,  Esq.,  that  he  saw  Bishop  Doane  drunk  at  Stelle's  hotel  in 
New  Brunswick. 

George  Thompson,  of  Bordentown,  told  Mr.  Gill,  Mr.  Halsted 
and  the  Rev.  Mr.  Henry  Sherman,  (notwithstanding  his  subse- 
quent contradictory  statement  under  oath,)  that  he  saw  Bishop 
Doane  intoxicated  in  the  street  in  Bordentown. 

New  York,  August  3,  1853. 

Hon.  IVm.  Halsted,  Counsel  for  presenting  Bishops  in  the  case  of 

Bishop  Doane. 

Dear  Sir  :  At  your  request,  when  in  New  Brunswick,  a  few 
days  since,  I  made  inquiry  in  relation  to  the  rumor  that  Bishop 
Doane  was  seen  much  intoxicated  in  that  city.  I  first  called 
upon  Mr.  Frederick  R.  Shillow,  who  declared  positively  that  if 
he  knew  when  a  man  was  intoxicated  the  Bishop  was  so  on  the 
day  he,  the  Bishop,  was  in  New  Brunswick,  and  that  he  was 
willing  to  go  before  any  court  and  testify  to  it.  I  inquired  of 
several  others;  some  admitted  the  fact  but  refused  to  allow  their 
names  to  be  used  ;  others  replied  that  they  were  friends  of  the 
Bishop,  and  would  not  say  any  thing  about  it ;  others  refused  to 
answer  upon  the  ground  that  they  were  afraid  you  would  require 
them  to  attend  the  Bishops'  Court,  under  the  impression  that  you 
could  force  them  to  testify  as  in  a  civil  court.  I  think  Mr.  Shil- 
low the  only  man  you  can  get  to  attend  the  trial. 

In  haste,  yours  truly, 

J.  N.  BIRD. 


214 


B.  GILL'S  LETTER. 

The  undersigned  concurs  in  the  foregoing,  so  far  as  the  facts 
and  evidence  confirm  the  charges  of  the  three  Presenting  Bishops : 

However  he  may  regret  the  decision  of  the  court  in  the  dismis- 
sal of  the  case,  and  the  great  injustice  (unwittingly,  he  trusts)  they 
have  done  to  the  four  lavmen,  he  cannot  feel  it  incumbent  on  him 
to  appear  in  collision  with  that  venerable  body,  wrell  knowing 
from  past  experience  the  great  difficulty  of  contending  with  such 
a  daring,  able  and  subtle  person  as  the  Respondent;  of  that  in- 
dividual the  undersigned  would  not  add  a  word  unnecessarily  to 
lessen  him  further  in  the  estimation  of  the  church  or  the  public. 

In  the  trying  circumstances  through  which  he  and  his  co-ad- 
jutors  have  passed,  he  can  conscientiously  say,  that  he  has  en- 
deavored to  divest  himself  from  all  personal  feeling,  and  has  acted 
(so  far  as  human  infinity  would  permit)  solely  for  the  honor  and 
welfare  of  the  church. 

BENNINGTON  GILL. 


POSTSCRIPT. 

The  confession  of  Bishop  Doane,  which  induced  the  dismissal 
of  the  presentment,  was  made  in  September,  1853,  and  it  con- 
tains the  following  language : 

"  In  reference  to  his  indebtedness,  he  now  renews  the  declara- 
tion of  intention  which  he  has  constantly  made,  and  has  acted 
on  to  the  utmost  of  his  ability  thus  far,  to  devote  his  means,  efforts 
and  influence,  in  dependence  on  God's  blessing,  to  the  payment  of 
principal  and  interest  of  every  just  demand  against  him;  an  expec- 
tation which  there  is  reasonable  hope  of  having  fulfilled,  since  a 
Committee  of  the  Trustees  and  friends  of  Burlington  College,  by 
whom  both  institutions  are  now  carried  on,  have  undertaken  an 
enterprise,  which  is  nearly  accomplished,  to  discharge  the  whole 
mortgage  debt,  and  thus  secure  the  property  at  Riverside  and  St. 
Mary's  Hall,  with  that  of  Burlington  College,  to  the  Church 
forever,  for  the  purpose  of  Christian  Education.  And  this  done, 
the  Trustees  have  further  agreed  to  appropriate,  during  his  life, 
the  surplus  income  of  both  institutions  to  the  liquidation  of  other 
debts  incurred  by  him  in  carrying  on  said  institutions." 

This  was  undoubtedly  received  by  the  Court  of  Bishops  as  a 
sincere  and  solemn  promise,  not  only  that  Bishop  Doane  was  im- 
mediately to  go  to  work  and  pay  all  he  could  to  his  creditors, 
but  that  the  enterprise  of  paying  off  the  "  whole  mortgage  debts'' 
was  nearly  accomplished.  And  it  was  industriously  circulated 
by  Bishop  Doane's  friends  through  the  Diocese,  and  no  doubt 
among  the  members  of  the  Court,  that  upwards  of  one  hundred 
and  twenty  thousand  dollars  had  already  been  subscribed  towards 
this  object,  Bishop  Lee,  of  Delaware,  in  his  vindication  of  the 
action  of  the  Court  of  Bishops,  page  12,  speaking  of  this  con- 
fession, says,  "  Upon  this  statement,  the  Court  was  disposed  to 
put  a  candid  and  generous  construction.  They  took  it  as  a  whole, 
and  acted  upon  it  as  a  sincere  and  candid  representation  of  Bishop 
Doane's  own  convictions  of  past  error  and  misconduct." 

On  page  14,  Bishop  Lee  says,  "  He  (Bishop  Doane)  declared 


/ 


216 

his  intention  to  devote  his  means,  in  dependence  upon  God's  bless- 
ing, to  the  payment,  principal  and  interest,  of  every  just  demand 
against  him,  and  referred   to  a   plan  then  on  foot  for  raising 
a  large  sum  of  money  as  furnishing  a  reasonable  hope  of  fulfilling 
this  promise."     The   Court  then  put  a   "generous  construction" 
upon  this  "  promise."    What  was  their  understanding  of  it  1    Why, 
that  there  was  a  project  on  foot  by  which  a  large  sum  of  money 
was  to  be  received,  and  that  there  was  a  reasonable  hope  of  its 
being  paid  to  the  creditors  of  Bishop  Doane,  and  that  the  pro- 
perty at  Riverside  and  St.  Mary's  Hall,  with  that  of  Burlington 
College,  was  to  be  secured  to  the  Church  forever.     These  cer- 
tainly were  very  magnificent  promises,  and  with   a  "generous 
construction"  of  them,  such  as   truthful  and  pious  Bishops  would 
feel  disposed  to  place  on  the  solemn  promise  of  a  brother  Bishop, 
must  have  had  great  influence   upon  the   minds  of  men  who  sup- 
posed that  there  was  even  a  remote  probability  of  their  ever  being 
performed.    But  if  they  had  taken  the  trouble  to  inquire  of  Bishop 
Doane's  creditors  the   value   of  his  promises,  they  would  have 
been  told  that  in  their  opinion  the  whole  of  these  magnificent 
promises  were  mere  moonshine,  artfully  worded,  and  made  for 
the  purpose  of  extricating  himself  from  the  dilemma  in  which  he 
was  placed,  without  any  reasonable  expectation  of  their  ever 
being  performed.     But  if  the  Reverend  Judges  were  unwilling  to 
consult  Bishop  Doane's  creditors,  for   whom   these  magnificent 
promises  were  ostensibly  made,  they,  it  is  presumed,  might  have 
been  led   to  doubt  .of  their  sincerity  if  they  had  only  called   to 
mind  some  of  the   practical  lessons  which   they  so  often  enforce 
upon  their  hearers  from  the  pulpit,  viz:  that  little  confidence  can 
be  placed  in  sick-bed  promises  or  repentances ;  they  are  like  the 
morning  cloud  and  early  dew,  they  soon  pass  away,  with  the  oc- 
currence that  gave  them  birth,  and  are  forgotten.     It  is  certainly 
due  to  the  members  of  Court,  who  relied  on  this  promise,  that 
Bishop  Doane  and  his  Committee  of  friends  and  Trustees  should 
take  the   most  effectual   and  speedy  means  to  perform  this  pro- 
mise, and  to  show  the  Church  that  its  highest  and  most  dignified 
Court  was  not  completely  cajoled  and  humbugged.     It  is  due  to 
the  creditors  of  Bishop  Doane  that  some  explanation  should  be 


217 

given  why,  after  a  lapse  of  more  than  seven  months,  nothing  has 
been  done  towards  the  payment  of  the  principal  or  interest  of 
their  judgments  or  mortgages.  It  is  due  to  "  the  Committee  of 
the  Trustees  and  friends  of  Burlington  College,"  who  permitted 
the  influence  of  their  official  station  to  be  used  in  connection 
with  this  promise,  that  they  should  state  what  has  become  of  the 
large  fund  which  was  about  being  received  for  the  payment  of 
Bishop  Doane's  debts.  If  they  will  be  so  kind  as  to  enlighten 
the  public  or  the  creditors  of  Bishop  Doane,  we  would  respect- 
fully ask  a  reply  to  the  following  questions.  If  they  do  not,  the 
creditors  of  Bishop  Doane,  and  the  public  at  large,  will  not  fail 
to  believe  that  the  whole  of  this  confession,  and  the  whole  of  the 
promises,  which  appear  to  have  made  it  acceptable  to  the  Court, 
were  intended  for  deception ;  that  no  money  was  raised  or  in- 
tended to  be  raised  for  the  payment  of  Bishop  Doane's  debts, 
but  that  it  was  a  mere  artful  contrivance  to  enable  him  to  escape 
trial  and  exposure,  by  adding  to  the  long  catalogue  of  broken 
promises  with  which  he  is  charged,  one  still  more  reprehensible, 
because  made  to  his  brother  Bishops  under  circumstances  of  pe- 
culiar solemnity,  and  under  protestations  of  contrition  and  re- 
pentance. 

First.  How  many  and  what  amount  of  debts  of  Bishop  Doanu 
have  been  paid  since  this  confession,  and  when  and  to  whom  \ 

Second.  How  much  of  the  mort^a^e  debt  which  existed 
against  Bishop  Doane  at  the  time  of  his  confession  has  since 
been  paid  ;  if  any.  when  and  to  whom  ? 

Third.  Has  any  part  of  the  fifty  thousand  dollars  mortgage, 
or  the  interest  upon  it,  been  paid  since  said  confession  ;  if  so, 
when  and  to  whom  ? 

Fourth.  If  any  of  Bishop  Doane's  debts  have  been  paid  since 
his  confession,  either  principal  or  interest,  what  is  the  principle 
of  discrimination  by  which  the  heaviest  creditors,  those  who  have 
suffered  most,  and  those  who  have  judgments  against  him,  viz  : 
Messrs.  Hays,  Deacon,  Munsig  and  Bowman,  are  excluded  from 
all  participation  in  these  payments  ?  * 

Fifth.  If  "  The  Committee  of  the  Trustees"  have  not  been 
able,  within  the  period  of  seven  months  after  the  date  of  the  con- 


218 

fession,  to  raise  money  enough  to  pay  the  interest  upon  the  fifty 
thousand  dollars  mortgage,  how  many  years  will  it  take  them  to 
pay  the  principal  of  the  mortgage  debts  1 

Sixth.  If  the  "  Committee  of  the  Trustees"  can't,  in  seven 
months,  raise  money  enough  to  pay  the  interest  on  the  judgments 
against  Bishop  Doane,  how  many  years  will  they  require  to  pay 
the  principal  of  these  judgments'? 

Seventh. .  If  no  steps  have  been  taken  by  the  Committee,  within 
the  last  seven  months,  to  pay  either  the  principal  or  interest  of 
the  mortgage  or  judgment  debts,  when  may  the  simple  contract 
creditors  of  Bishop  Doane  entertain  "  an  expectation,  which  there 
is  reasonable  hope  of  having  fulfilled,"  that  their  just  demands 
against  him  will  ever  be  paid? 

Eighth.  Will  the  "  Committee  of  the  Trustees  and  friends  of 
Burlington  College"  gratify  the  simple  contract  creditors  of  Bish- 
op Doane  so  much  as  to  state  "  what  is  the  amount  of  the  surplus 
income  of  both  institutions,"  which  they  intend  to  appropriate  to 
the  liquidation  of  their  debts? 

Ninth.  Will  the  "  Committee  of  the  Trustees  and  friends  of 
Burlington  College"  favor  the  public  and  the  creditors  of  Bishop 
Doane  with  their  names,  in  order  that  they  may  be  enabled  to 
present  them  with  suitable  congratulatory  resolutions  for  their 
great  diligence  in  prosecuting  an  enterprise  which  was  "  nearly 
completed1'  seven  months  since? 


INDEX. 


a 


t( 


tc 


A. 


Account  of  Assignees, 

Affidavit  of  Joseph  Deacon,      - 

Michael  Hays,        - 

Mrs.  Elizabeth  Hays,      - 

William  Munsig,  - 

Assignment  of  Bishop  Doane,    - 

Answer  of  Michael  Hays, 

Articles  of  Agreement  between  E.  G.  Doane  and  Jo- 
seph Deacon, 

B. 

Buildings  of  Schools,  &c,  cost  of 

Binney,  Horace,  pamphlet  of    - 

Bond,  Guardianship      ..--.-. 

Black,  John,  letter  of        -----         - 

Barclay,  VV.  J.,  affidavit  of 

Bird,  J.  N.,  letter  of 

c. 

Christian  Education,  pretence  of  expenditures  for 
Coxe,  Richard  S.,  letter  of,  to  W.  Halsted, 
Check  drawn  on  bank  when  no  funds  there, 
Check  unpaid,  specification  of  - 
Creditors  of  Bishop  Doane,  who  funded  their  debt, 
Creditors  omitted  from  his  list,  - 

Coxe,  Richard  S.,  letters  of 

Court  of  Bishops,  remarks  upon  - 

Confession,  Bishop  Doane's        - 

Camden  Bank,  loan  by 

Carse,  Mary,  letters  of 


199 
164 
96 
204 
197 
127 
184-5 

207 


14 
38-47 
172 
210 
206 
213 


16 

59 

48 

108 

21 

54-55 

69 

66-91 

81 

108 

192-5-6 


220 


D. 

Debts  of  Bishop  Doane,  statement  of 

Debts  of  Bishop  Doane,  specifications  concerning 

Doane,  G.  W.,  letter  of 

Deacon,  Joseph,  affidavit  of  -         -         - 

Deed  from  S.  R.  Gummere  and  wife,  to  G.  D.  Wall 
and  others,  in  trust,        .-.._. 
Deed  from  G.  D.  Wall  and  others,  to  G.  W.  Doane,   - 
Deacon,  Sarah  Ann,  affidavit  of 


4-6 

109 

29 

104 

146 

148 
205 


E. 

Examination  of  Bishop  Doane, 
Extravagance  in  purchase  of  liquor, 


137-143 
206 


G. 

Germain,  Reuben,  examination  of 
Germain,  Reuben,  loan  by 
Gill,  Bennington,  letter  of 


173-174 
107 
214 


H. 


Hooker,  Herman,  his  account, 
Hays,  Michael,  affidavit,  - 


.. 


.. 


Hays,  obtaining  endorsement  from  .... 
Hays,  obtaining  endorsements  from  Joseph  Deacon  and 
Hays,  Elizabeth,  affidavit  of 


33 

96 

201 

100 

101-2-3 

204 


Inventory  of  Bishop  Doane's  property, 
Intoxication,  specification  of 

"  proof  of        -----         ■ 

Indorsements,  specification  in  regard  to  procuring 

L. 

Libellous  charges  made  by  Bishop  Doane  against  lay- 
men,   --------- 

Loan  of  fifty  thousand  dollars,  - 

Letter  of  G.  W.  Doane,    ------ 

Lying,  Bishop  Potter  on   - 

Letter  of  the  four  laymen  to  the  three  Bishops,  - 


128 

126 

212-13 

100 


3 

20 
26 
63 
93 


221 


a 
ti 

a 


List  of  Bishop  Doane's  creditors,        -  133 

Letter  ot  Michael  Hays  to  Bishop  Doane,  -         -         -  144 

Letter  of  Herman  Hooker  to  Bishop  Doane,        -         -  146 

Letter  of  G.  W.  Doane  to  Joseph  Deacon,           -         -  171-172 

Loan  of  $50,000,  specification  of       ....  104-105 

Liquor  purchased  by  G.  W.  Doane,  -  206 

Letters  of  Mary  Carse, 192-6 

Letter  of  J.  N.  Bird, 213 

M. 

Moneys  received  by  Bishop  Doane,  -  11-12 

Miller,  Hugh,  quotation  from     -----  ]6 

Memorial  of  Michael  Havs  to  Convention,          -         -  143 

Mortgage  from  G.  W.  Doane  to  H.  R.  Cleveland',        -  155 

Mortgage  from  G.  W.  Doane  to  Sarah  C.  Robardet,  -  150 

"         to  Joseph  Deacon,          -  147-148 

"         to  Isaac  B.  Parker,        -  159 

"         to     Isaac     B.     Parker, 

Thomas  Milnor  and  others,   -----  161 

Mortgage  from  G.  W.  Doane  to  Wm.  Chester,  -         -  174 

Mis-statements  of  G.  VV.  Doane,  specification  of          -  121 

Munsig,  Wm.,  affidavit  of 197 

O. 

Order  of  Eliza  G.  Doane,  and  executors  of  J.  Perkins,  37 

Oath  of  G.  W.  Doane,  specifications  concerning          -  119 

P. 

Presentment  against  Bishop  Doane,   -  98 

Page,  Rev.  Christian,  statement  of     -         -         -         -  212 

Postscript, 215 

R. 

Robardet,  Mrs.,  her  mortgage, 32 

Real  Estate  of  G.  W.  Doane, 175-176 

Record  of  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts,       -         -  277 

8. 

Sfubbs,  Rev.  Mr.,  his  loan  to  Bishop  Doane,       -         -  22 

Swearing  false,  what         ------  51 

Stubbs,  Rev.  Alfred,  loan  by 106 


/ 


222 

T. 

Trustees,  duty  of,  as  to  investment  of  money,        -  24 

Liability  for  breach  of  trust, 27 

Truth,  Bishop  Doane  on   - 62 

z. 

Zantzinger's  bill  for  liquor, 20G 


ERRATA. 

Page  5,  line  23,  after  word  "page  16,"  insert  of  "  Report  of 
Committee  of  Investigation." 

Page  64,  line  2,  for  "  Doane,"  read  "  Deacon" 


J 


■  ill 


